What's your excuse?
The Yamas: The Universal Great Vow
Join the Reddit community to ask questions, share learnings, and have open, anonymous discussions.
Om Sri Gurubhyo Namah. Salutations to all the teachers.
Over the past several weeks, we have been discussing the first limb of Yoga - the five Yamas. They deal with the most outwardly aspect of our being - our interactions with the external world, and are a tool to use our daily lives as a method to weaken the kleshas, remove avidya, increase vivek and simplify our external dealings so that it is easier to progress to the following limbs.
The Yamas are not moral injunctions, and there is no compulsion to follow them. The reason this is reiterated so many times is that we are trained from a very young age to look at these behaviours as somehow morally “right”, and opposing them as “wrong.” Yoga does not make any such claims. The Yamas are simply a method - that is all.
Knowing that the Yamas are a method, there is no room for judgement of others (in fact, this judgement is itself a violation of the Yama of satya, and ultimately of ahimsa). It is an individual’s choice to practice however much they can, even if that means not at all. Yoga is an intensely personal journey, and everyone is on their own path.
As an aside, it may be interesting to note that the exact same Yamas of Yoga also appear in the Jain tradition, where they are given the same name that Patanjali uses here - Mahaavrat - the great vows. They also appear in the Nyaya philosophy, despite its several differences with the Yoga school. The various Buddhist schools also have something similar to the Yamas in the five shilas, except that aparigraha (non-possession) is replaced with non-intoxication.
As a reminder, the five Yamas are:
Ahimsa: Non-violence
Satya: Truthfulness
Asteya: Non-stealing
Brahmacharya: Non-indulgence
Aparigraha: Non-possession
Now that we have understood what they are, we can discuss the way in which they are to be practiced.
The Yamas as the Great Vows
जातिदेशकालसमयान्नवच्छिन्नाः सार्वभौमा महाव्रतम्॥JaatiDeshaKaalaSamayaAnavacchinnah saarvabhaumaa mahaaVratamUnbroken/not exempted by class, place, time or circumstance, [the Yamas become] the great Universal vows.
- Yoga Sutras, 2.31
What is a vow? A person decides something, and then follows it no matter what.
In the context of the Yamas, however, since they are to be practiced in thought, word, and deed, this might seem extremely difficult. One may be able to hold off in terms of their actions, and perhaps even their words, but what about in terms of thoughts? How can we not have thoughts that are contrary to the Yamas? Just by deciding to not feel jealous, for example, will we actually no longer feel jealousy? And what should we do when thoughts like that arise?
This can easily be read as an injunction to suppress thoughts that oppose the Yamas, but this is not the case. Opposing thoughts will arise, and most likely, no matter how strong your desire to follow them, you will find yourself breaking the Yamas from time to time. But then what is the meaning of this sutra?
Simply said, in order for the Yamas to be effective, the Yogi must strive for perfection in their practice. Be as non-violent as possible, in thought, word, and deed, tell the truth, do not steal, avoid indulgence and possessiveness. Be constantly aware of when the mind has opposing reactions, and gently let the thoughts go. We will discuss the method of how to do this in a future article on Pratipakshabhaavana (cultivation of opposing thoughts), but for now, this is sufficient.
Now what does the word “Universal” mean?
A few years ago, the writer went to a Yoga studio, and somehow got into a discussion with the teacher about the Yoga Sutras. At some point the teacher said, “You can disregard the Yoga Sutras, they are not relevant to today’s day and age.”
This sutra is a direct response to this exact line of thinking.
Even in Patanjali’s time, there were several different schools of thought on how to attain liberation, and one can imagine certain groups trying to exempt themselves from the Yamas. One can imagine warriors from the kshatriya (warrior) class vying for exemptions, or members of meat-eating sects1 trying to look for exceptions to the rule. In response to this, Patanjali has clearly defined the meaning of saarvabhaumaa (universal) to ensure clarity for the student on the path of Yoga. In essence, regardless of each of these categories, violating the Yamas always leads to a strengthening of avidya.
In the context of the Yamas, the word saarvabhaumaa, or “universal” has four aspects:
Jaati: Class/Family of birth
Desh: Place
Kaal: Time
Samay: Circumstance
Let us go over each one. For each of these, we will use the example of ahimsa (non-violence), since it is the most important of the Yamas. However, this categorisation applies to all of the Yamas, unless practising them would contradict ahimsa.
Additionally, each of these categories applies in two ways:
For the Yogi: The particulars of the birth (e.g. the time period in which they were born, the class into which they were born, etc.)
In these situations: The particulars of the situation in which the Yogi finds themselves (e.g. the time of the year, the class of the person they are interacting with, etc.)
Jaati: Class/Family of birth
For the Yogi
Regardless of jaati (class), following the Yamas reduces avidya, and violating them increases it. That is, the Yamas apply no matter who you are, or what class, caste, or family you were born into.
Consider a fisherman. In order to make a living, a fisherman must kill fish. Due to no (apparent) fault of their own, they were born into a family of fishermen, and so they followed the family business and continued fishing. Regardless of the family of their birth, in killing fish, the fisherman is contradicting the Yama of ahimsa, and is strengthening the self-other divide in their own mind.
Another traditional example considers the kshatriya - the warrior class. Their dharma (righteous duty) is to fight. However, even for the kshatriya, there is no exception in Yoga. Regardless of their class, for such a person, the Yamas have not yet become universal great vow (saarvabhauma mahaavratam), and regardless of what they felt their duty was, the contradiction of the Yama will strengthen their avidya.
P: In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna tells Arjuna to do his sva-dharma (duty) as a kshatriya (warrior) and fight, but this is violent. Is Krishna, then, contradicting the teachings of Yoga?
Jogi: It is not a contradiction, it is simply a different angle.
P: How so?
Jogi: The Yoga Sutras provide ahimsa as a method to weaken the samskaaras (mental impressions) which differentiate us from those around us on the vyavahaarika (transactional) level. As long as you feel that you are separate from those around you, ahimsa as a practice will help you to weaken that avidya. On the other hand, in the Gita, Krishna is providing the direct teaching to Arjuna, speaking the paramaarthika-level (ie. Ultimate) Truth that he is not separate from everything around him. He says, for example, that the killer who considers himself a killer, and the killed who considers himself killed do not know, for neither is one the killer, and neither is the other killed (Gita 2.19).
P: What does this mean?
Jogi: In simple terms, Krishna is saying that all this is Brahman, the Ultimate, non-dual Reality, and these ideas of “killer”, “killed”, “killing”, etc. are all creations of mind through avidya. In Truth, there is just Brahman.
P: What does this mean in simple terms? Can you give an example?
Jogi: For example, we look at a tree, the leaf, the soil, and say - “oh, there is a tree, there is a leaf, there is the soil”, but where does the tree end and the leaf begin? This distinction is in the mind. Once this is seen, one can be apparently engaged in action, Knowing that there is no action.
In fact, Krishna also suggests ahimsa at various places in the Gita (e.g. 6.10, 10.4, 16.2, 17.4). However, in the context of him telling Arjuna to fight, he is not telling Arjuna to commit violence - rather, he is saying that violence itself is an invention of mind, which is yet another wave in the sea of Brahman.
Ultimately speaking, there is no non-violence or violence. These are both creations of mind within Maya. But this is not how it seems to us in our everyday lives. Yoga helps us to break out of this ignorance.
P: Wait a second, if all this is a creation of mind within Maya, are the teachings of Yoga also a creation of mind within Maya?
Jogi: Absolutely!
P: So if the teachings are unreal, what is the point of all this?
Jogi: In order to remove a thorn, one must use a second thorn to remove it from the skin, and then throw both thorns away. In order to cross a river, you need a boat, but you have no need for the boat once you have gotten to the other side.
P: Huh?
Jogi: Just because something is a creation of the mind doesn’t mean it is meaningless or useless. The teaching of Yoga is for those of us who are convinced that we are a body with a mind. It uses avidya to help us get out of avidya.2
If this line of thinking is too much, don’t worry. It can also be considered as follows: the goal is ultimately to reduce violence as much as possible. It is not all or nothing, although we must strive for perfection so as to reduce avidya as much as possible. The goal is to make the Yamas become our universal great vow (saarvabhauma mahaavratam), even though we may not be there yet.
In these situations
One might feel that they are not violent towards most people, but that it is somehow acceptable to be violent to some particular classes of people. Remember, violence extends to thought, word, and deed, and so if physical violence is not relatable to you, perhaps verbal violence, or violence in thought may be.
For example, one may wish harm upon those who have different beliefs, or are from a different country than themselves. One may feel like it is ok to be violent towards criminals, towards people from an enemy nation, or perhaps towards animals. However, unless non-violence is extended to all classes of beings, the Yama of ahimsa is not established as a Universal Great Vow in the mind of the practitioner.
One need only think of the pandemic, where certain groups of people refused to wear masks or get vaccinated. Those who were following the guidelines may have had thoughts such as “they deserve to get sick” or “serves them right.” These are thoughts of violence towards a group with a different set of beliefs, and are contrary to the universality of the Yama of ahimsa. Avidya doesn’t care about your personal identity, or the identity of those against whom you commit violence. Regardless of class, violating the Yamas strengthens avidya.
Desh: Place
For the Yogi
Whatever the location of the Yogi, the Yamas are to be followed. For example, if you come from a place where vegetarian food is hard to come by, or where the culture is a meat-eating culture, and so you eat meat, this is not an exemption from the Yama of ahimsa, and still leads to a strengthening of the mental division between self and other.
In these situations
The traditional example considers a person who abstains from violence only in sacred places, but commits violence elsewhere. For example, a person may eat vegetarian food when they are in a temple, or in a holy city, or at home, but kill animals (or get others to do so) when they are out with their friends. Perhaps we think, “I will be vegetarian at home, but when I travel I eat meat.”
This kind of violence means that ahimsa has not yet become a Universal Great Vow, and still strengthens the self-other divide.
Another example is one who speaks the truth or acts peaceful only in a place of worship, but freely tells lies or acts differently elsewhere.
Avidya doesn’t care about your physical location. The Yogi must strive for perfection in the Yamas, no matter what place they are in, in order to maximally reduce avidya.
Kaal: Time
For the Yogi
Whatever time period the Yogi is born in - India in the 5th century BC, or the 21st century United States - the Yamas still apply. No matter what the time period of their birth, a violation of the Yamas will lead to a strengthening of avidya.
In these situations
The traditional commentaries give the example of a Yogi who abstains from violence on certain calendar days, such as the fourteenth day of the lunar cycle, or during certain religious holidays. This is a common occurrence regardless of one’s traditional background - perhaps you decide not to eat meat during Lent, or during Navaratri, or perhaps you abstain from hurting other people during the month of Ramadan. This category makes it clear that regardless of when the Yama is broken, it leads to a strengthening of avidya.
Avidya doesn’t care what the lunar cycle says, or what the local religious authority has told you - the self-other divide can be strengthened no matter what the calendar and the clock say, and so the Yogi must strive to follow the Yamas at all times.
Samay: Circumstance
For the Yogi
Perhaps the Yogi is born into poverty, and must kill or steal in order to survive. This kind of action, even though necessary for survival given the circumstances, has prioritised the body-mind of the actor over and above others, thus strengthening the self-other divide in the mind. As a result, it is a contradiction of the Yamas. No matter what circumstance the Yogi is born into, violating the Yamas will increase the self-other divide.
To be clear, this doesn’t mean that stealing is somehow wrong, regardless of circumstances. In times of tremendous suffering, it is often necessary to violate the Yamas. However, this comes at the cost of increasing avidya.
In these situations
Let us consider the example of a warrior. They may be non-violent at all times, except during a battle. Even though it is their duty to fight in the battle, and even though they may be acting for all the “right” reasons, committing violence, regardless of the circumstance, is a violation of the Yamas.
Another example from the traditional commentaries is that of a person who says they will not commit violence except in the name of God. No matter how righteous one may feel in their dispensation of violence, this sutra makes it clear that it is a violation of the Yama, and will strengthen the self-other divide. Avidya doesn’t care about circumstances.
The mind finds excuses
In these ways, the Yamas are universal. No matter the place, time period, or circumstance, and no matter the class of the Yogi, violating the Yamas leads to an increase in avidya, and keeps the individual trapped in the cycle of dukkha. Additionally, no matter what place the Yogi finds themselves in, whatever time or circumstance it may be in their lives, and regardless of the class or category of the person with whom they are interacting, the Yamas still apply.
Practically speaking, the Yamas do not begin this way. It is certainly not easy to practice them in all places, times, circumstances, and with all people. But this is the method - to strive for perfection in the Yamas, doing the best that we can, even if it feels unattainable, and in this way systematically breaking down the avidya in our minds.
When it comes to things that are difficult, the mind is very clever, and will writhe and wrestle to find excuses. Waking up in the morning on a cold day is a great example. The alarm will ring, but the mind will create reasons that seem valid - “I can skip my shower and sleep in an extra ten minutes”, “I can skip the morning meeting - no one will notice if I’m not there”, or “I need my sleep, otherwise I will feel tired the whole day.” Now these aren’t wrong - in fact, all of these may be true. However, the point is that the mind is wrestling to find a way out of a situation that it doesn’t want to be in.
In this example, in terms of Yoga psychology, the raag-klesha (colouring of attraction) for the vritti (mental movement) of sleep is strong, and it overpowers the buddhi (intellect, the decider). As a result, you stay in bed.
Similarly, even though you may intellectually understand that violating the Yamas will strengthen avidya, the mind will angle to find excuses - “I need my protein”, “that person hurt me, so I’m right to hurt them”, “I need possessions to survive, so I must protect them”, and so many more. This is the purpose of this sutra. There are no mental gymnastics that can reduce the effect of violating the Yamas. In all places, situations, and circumstances, and for all people, acting in accordance with the Yamas breaks down avidya, and acting against them strengthens it.
Knowing this fact, and understanding the reasoning, the Yogi can strive for perfection in the Yamas, safe from the wiles of the mind, knowing that any excuse that it may try to make does not apply.
Until next time:
As you practice the Yamas, notice when your mind is trying to make an excuse to violate them.
Now ask, what category does the mind’s excuse fall into? Class, place, time, or circumstance?
Take notes to find patterns. What are the triggers that set off these excuses in the mind?
As always, please don’t hesitate to reach out directly by responding to this email or posting in the comments section below - no question, objection, or comment is out of bounds.
Next time: The Niyamas: The second limb of Yoga - Shauch (cleanliness)
There are certain (not all) Tantric traditions known as “left-handed” schools that prescribe the eating of meat, alcohol, marijuana, tobacco, and indulgence in sexual practices under highly ritualised circumstances with the intention of transcending dualistic ideas of cleanliness and uncleanliness (the second aspect of avidya). Even here, though, the activities are not performed for the pursuit of pleasure, but rather for the removal of avidya, and always within the context of liberation. Schools in this category also prescribe covering oneself in traditionally aversive substances like ash from a crematorium, urine, feces, as a method to transcend the kleshas. Given this, it is important to remember that the path of Raja Yoga that we are discussing is only one of many paths to the Ultimate Truth.
A brief note on the levels of reality in Vedanta: There are three so-called levels or layers to reality as we see them. The lowest is called pratibhaasikha, or illusory - an example of this is when you see a mirage. You consider there to be water, when there is actually no water present. The second, or middle layer is called vyavahaarika, or transactional - this is our everyday reality where there is a world, different beings, you, me, this, and that. Notice, both pratibhaasika and vyavahaarika exist simultaneously, although one is more real than the other, and one sublates (or negates) the other. To be more specific, the moment you realise that there is no water, you might still see the shimmering, but you are no longer taken up by the mirage. You know that it is just a mirage. Finally, there is the Ultimate level of reality, known as Paramaarthika. Here, it is clear that all objects are mental creations, and that there is really no boundary between self and other, even though it may appear this way. Notice the similarity with the example of the mirage - you see the mirage, but you know it’s not there. Similarly, in Paramaarthika, you see the differentiation between objects, but you know it’s just a series of mental constructs and conventions layered upon the underlying Reality. This underlying Reality is known as Brahman, and will be the subject of several future articles. For the purposes of Yoga, it is important to understand the point of view from which the teachings come. All of Yoga functions at the vyavahaarika level, where the student still takes the ideas of self, other, and objects seriously. You really feel like you are a body, with a mind, separate from the world around you. In order to clarify this feeling, called avidya, Yoga takes the practitioner on a journey using the constructs they already have, to show, viscerally, their unreality. This is why it may seem as though there are contradictions in the teachings, or in various stories. The Gita is an excellent example of this, where Krishna is speaking from the Paramaarthika level, where it is clear that all of the characters, events, and actions are as though a part of a mirage - unreal in themselves. Yoga, on the other hand, is a method for the practitioner to whom this is not yet clear.
Now why does this matter to you, the Yogi?
Well, be honest with yourself. Do you consider yourself to be a separate body-mind? Do you feel like you are somehow seated behind your eyes? If so, you are living on the vyavahaarika level, and so the Yamas are the appropriate method. If this is not clear, feel free to reach out on the subreddit, or by responding directly to this email.