Samkhya Karika with Srivatsa Ramaswamim

In this episode, I welcome Srivatsa Ramaswami to the program to discuss his book Samkhya Karika: A Yoga Practitioner's Guide to Overcoming the Three Causes of Suffering. The conversation delves into the relationship between philosophy and yoga, the concepts of Purusha and Prakriti, and the Three Gunas. Ramaswami provides an in-depth exploration of Samkhya philosophy, drawing comparisons with modern science to make ancient teachings accessible to contemporary yoga practitioners. The episode further explores the philosophical grounding of Samkhya in Indian philosophy, the differences between Samkhya and Yoga Sutras, and the goal of achieving Kaivalya through the practice of samadhi. Don't miss this insightful discussion on spirituality, consciousness, and overcoming suffering.

Support Rebel Spirit Radio

https://patreon.com/rebelspirit

https://paypal.me/rebelspiritradio

Srivatsa Ramaswami

https://www.vinyasakrama.com/Main_Page

Samkhya Karika

Inner Traditions

https://www.innertraditions.com/samkhya-karika

Bookshop.org

https://bookshop.org/p/books/samkhya-karika-a-yoga-practitioner-s-guide-to-overcoming-the-three-causes-of-suffering-srivatsa-ramaswami/21672911?ean=9798888501535&next=t

Connect with Rebel Spirit on Social Media

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/rebelspiritradio

Bluesky: @rebelspiritradio.bsky.social

Threads: @rebelspiritradio

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/rebelspiritradio https://www.rebelspiritradio.com

#yoga #yogaphilosophy #samkhya #samkhyakarika

Episode Transcript

(00:00):
On this episode of Rebel Spirit Radio.

(00:03):
According to these philosophies, mostpeople are unhappy most of the time.
So it is, it is a means by which youcan reduce the unhappiness during our
lifetime and also prevent the future.
But this is the whole approach.
At the same time, they are not tryingto find out some, you know, some
some means by which you can overcomethese these, these difficulties.
But they want to go to the root,root of the I mean the truth

(00:26):
about, truth about the universe,truth about the individual self.
So knowing the truth, they say it ispossible for us to overcome the grief
because the truth is so what do call sosatisfying, so great that we need not
suffer like this the way we are suffering.
That's their goal.
They're not merely offering you somepalliatives by which you'll be able

(00:46):
to work on the degree, but they sayif you know the truth about these
things, about your own self, right,then it'll be possible for everybody
to not to suffer the way people are
suffering.
Welcome to Rebel Spirit Radio,exploring the frontiers of spirituality,

(01:08):
consciousness, the esoteric and humanity'ssacred relationship with a living earth.
I'm your host, Nick Mather.
In this episode, I welcome SrivatsaRamaswami to the show to discuss
his book, Samkhya Karika, a YogaPractitioner's Guide to Overcoming
the three Causes of Suffering.
The discussion covers the relationshipbetween philosophy and yoga, exploring
concepts like Purusha Prkrti, and theThree Gunas Ramaswami emphasizes the

(01:33):
philosophical underpinnings of Samkhyaand yoga, drawing comparisons with modern
science to make the ancient teachings moreaccessible to contemporary practitioners.
Also, please be sure to like and subscribeto this podcast on whatever platform
you use to listen to our review podcast.
Your support is truly appreciated.
Srivatsa Ramaswami studied with ShriKrishnamatcharya in India for 33 years.

(01:55):
From 1955 until Krishnamatcharya'spassing in 1987 at the age of 100,
Srivatsa Ramaswami taught yoga inuniversities, hospitals, and schools in
India for more than 20 years, and wasa visiting faculty at Loyola Marymount
University in Los Angeles for 15 years.
He is the author of many articlesand four books, including Yoga

(02:18):
for the Three Stages of Life.
He joins me today to discuss hislatest book, Samkhya Karika, A Yoga
Practitioner's Guide to OvercomingThe Three Causes of Suffering.
Srivatsa, welcome to Rebel Spirit Radio.
Yes, thank you for the.
Yes, yes.
Thank you very much.

(02:39):
Yes, yes.
Well, thank you.
Shall I say a short prayer?,
Yes
Very short.
Yeah.
Yes, yes.
Let's let's begin with a short payer.
Yes.
Ayindhu Karathanai Aanai MuhathanaiInthin Illam Pirai Polum Eyitranai
Nandhi Magan Thanai jnanak KozhunthinaiPundhiyil Vaithadi Potrukindraeney!!
All right.

(02:59):
Thank you.
Can you say what that was?
The, it's a translation,
Ganesha is the, what do you call,the elephant face deity, which
normally any activity we start,which we say a prayer to Ganesha.
This prayer is my, mymother tongue called Tamil.
Right.
It's not in Sanskrit.
It's my mother's tongue.
Right.
Oh, okay.
Tamil, is that correct?

(03:21):
Yeah.
Tamil, yes.
It's a South Indian language.
Oh, okay.
Okay.
Yes, I have a small little altarto Ganesh over here that I like
to make offerings to on occasion.
So, we're going to talk about the book.
And this is a translation of a text.
And it is it was written by afourth century sage Ishvarakrishna.

(03:46):
And then there's commentary by sixthcentury Vedic philosopher Gaudapada.
And I thought that the place for us tobegin would be to talk about Samkhya and
its place in Indian philosophy becauseI don't know how many people in my

(04:06):
audience, or in the west in general areall that familiar with Samkhya philosophy.
And I know that in India there'straditionally the six schools or six
darshanas as they're referred to.
Yes.
So if you could say a little bitabout Samkhya and perhaps it's
relation to yoga, because I knowit's always paired with yoga.

(04:29):
Okay.
Yes.
Many, many, many of you are familiar withthe, Vedas, you know, Vedas are the basic
what do you call scriptures in Indiaand then Vedas contain a large portion
of prayers to various gods, small gods.
It also contains a number of portionon, on the rituals you know, making

(04:51):
offerings to the gods called vajnayas.
And then there is another portion calledthe Upanishads, the philosophy portion,
the Vedanta portion, and then the, thereare in the, from the, from the, what do
you call the philosophical point of view.
There are six philosophies calleddarshanas, darshanas mean expositions.
Six darshanas are there.
Out three are called liberty sastras,liberty means, liberty sastras mean

(05:16):
they, they, their, their, their,their main goal is to remove the,
remove the pain and unhappiness inhuman beings, and also prevent future.
But according to these philosophy, theyall, they all believe in karma theory.
They all believe in karma theory.
So whatever, whatever activities that wedo some of it gets rectified during this
this particular life life lifetime restare carried over to the next, depending

(05:41):
upon the karma bundle, which is dominant,its a fairly well developed a philosophy.
So these three philosophies subscribeto the view, the to the philosophy
you know, the karma theory.
So their, their goal, all the three,their goal is to find out ways and
means by which you can avoid thefuture birth, according to them future,

(06:02):
this birth itself, according to them,according to these philosophies, most
people are unhappy most of the time.
So it is, it is a means by which youcan reduce the unhappiness during our
lifetime and also prevent the future.
But this is the whole approach.
At the same time, they are not tryingto find out some, you know, some
some means by which you can overcomethese these, these difficulties.

(06:24):
But they want to go the root, root of theI mean the truth about, truth about the
universe, truth about the individual self.
So knowing the truth, they say it ispossible for us to overcome the grief
because the truth is so, what do you callso satisfying, so great that we need not
suffer like this the way we are suffering.
That's their goal.

(06:44):
They're not merely offering you somepalliative by which you'll be able to
work on the pain to a degree, but theysay, if you know the truth about these
things, about your own self, right, thenit'll be possible for everybody to not
to suffer the way people are suffering.
So they want to remove ignorance ofwhat constitutes the real self, because
the real self, according to them, isabsolutely great, absolutely great,

(07:05):
pure, non-changing consciousness.
It is immortal.
So with that in view, they, they'retry to, they try to prove, they try
to give, give means by which we'll beable to achieve this particular goal.
So Samkhya of the three philosophies,Samkhya is the first philosophy that
came out with the, what do you call thetruth about the nature of one's own self.
According to them, the, the real self.

(07:27):
The real self, not the physical body.
The real self is said to be non-changing,pure consciousness, they call
Purusha or atman so many differentterms, depending on the context.
See this Purusha is, if, if my, if Imeans my, buddhi my intelligence, my
analyzing capability, you know, I gotthe this faculty, if that faculty is
able to understand the true nature ofthe Self, then it'll be able to stay

(07:51):
with that and then overcome the, whatyou call, overcome the wrong feeling that
the body mind complex is the real Self.
So this is their main approach,Samkhya's main approach.
And at the same time, they also,they're very logically explained,
the evolution of the universe itself.
So with that, they, they say thateverything that you got to know
so that you'll be able to livecomfortably for the rest of the

(08:13):
life and also about the future life.
So this is the main purpose of Samkhya.
The meaning of the word Samkhya is
thoroughly, means
some, something which is able tocompletely explain everything,
including the origin of the universe.
The evolution itself andthe true nature of the Self.

(08:34):
All these three are said to be beautifullyenunciated in this in this philosophy.
And Samkhya Karkia is said to beone of the, one of the best treaties
or text, which explains the Samkhyaphilosophy in a very logical way.
And the Samkhya, what do youcall the Samkhya author is
Ishvarakrishna, you said.
To be not only a scholar,scholar is also a great poet.

(08:55):
So even for many Sanskrit scholarscholars call the Samkhya Karika
as a Sanskrit classic itself.
So literally, literally, I, sorry.
As a literature is great andthe, what do you call the
philosophy also absolutely great.
So many people, at least the old,they, they used to pay a lot of
respect to Samkhya philosophy.

(09:17):
And then any, the, anybody whowants to talk about the the Indian
philosophy must have a very goodgrounding on the Samkhya philosophy.
We thought that the other philosophywill not be easily accessible.
Okay.
Yeah.
Thank you for that.
The, the Indian philosophy is veryinteresting, especially the Vedanta.

(09:38):
What comes after.
And I just a real quick question onthe title, the Karika I know that
in, in terms of the literature, right?
We have the Vedas which you mentioned,and then there's the kind of the
Vedanta, which I always saw as the, orlearned as like the end of the Vedas.

(10:00):
But I believe in the book, you refer tothem as the culmination of the Vedas.
I can hear well, can youa little louder, please?
You don't mind?
Yes.
Yeah, yeah.
Sorry.
But in the, i'll, I'll kind ofrepeat what I was just saying.
In terms of the Indian philosophicalliterature, we've got the Vedas, which
are the source of a lot, and then thereis Vedanta, which I always understood

(10:25):
or learned as the end of the Vedas.
In the book you mentioned Ithink you referred to them as
the culmination of the Vedas.
Yes.
Yes.
And this would be thingslike the Upanishads.
And then there's other writings that comeout, like the Aryanakas the and I never
know if I'm pronouncing the Puranas right.

(10:45):
And you get other kind of traditionslike the Pantanjali's Yoga Sutras.
And so I'm curious in terms ofKarika because that's referring to
a kind of text I think that we wouldconsider this part of Vedanta, part
of that culmination of the Vedas.

(11:06):
I hope I'm right with that.
But I'm kind of curious what its positionis in terms of, for example how is it
different than what we would refer to aslike the sutras, like the yoga sutras?
How is the, how is aKarka different than that?
See, Karika, Karika is to be, I mean,Karika means an exposition, right?

(11:30):
Mm-hmm.
As an exposition.
So Samkhya Karika, the, theSanmkhya philosophy is there,
and the Sanmkhya philosophy isexplained thoroughly by the Karkia.
There are, Karika is a special formof writing that support a subject.
There is nothing nothing uniqueabout this except that the, literally
speaking, it is a different way ofwriting, There are two great karikas.
One is the, one is Samkhya Karika.

(11:51):
The other one is called MandukyaKarika, written by Satyacharya's Guru.
So these are the two well known Karikathere, but it is, you know, as a karika
only only means that it is a very criticaland thorough exposition of the philosophy.
Right.
Okay.
And you are mentioningwhat Yoga Sutra right?
So Yoga Sutra is written in a differenttype of language, I mean different type of

(12:13):
formation, you know, it is called sutra.
Sutra is there, there are certain,certain rules and writing.
So sutras have a minimum number of words.
Minimum number of words, right?
Mm-hmm.
They, they, they, they weredispensed with dispense, with verbs.
There are no verbs in the sutras.
So, you know, the whole idea isbecause the whole is more, most
of the Vedas were not written.
They had to be heard from yourteacher, memorized then, passed

(12:35):
on to the next generation.
So there's some, what you call, somepeople wanted to, what you call simply,
zip, zip, zipped the whole thing.
You know, you, you condense itby removing unnecessary things.
And then later on with the sutra,there are other people who write the
detailed commentary on, on sutra.
So Pantanjali wrote it in a sutraform Samkhya Karika is written the

(12:57):
karika form in the form slokas.
But at the same time, even thoughit is written in the form of
slokas, it is also very condensed.
Very condensed.
Every word is very what doyou call has got a meaning.
You, you can't replace it with another word, that kind of a, a literary
work Samkhya Karkia is, right?
Okay.
Thank you.
That, that actually helps quite a bit.
And one of the terms that you use, I'mjust kind of, I, since I teach too,

(13:22):
it's, I always want to make sure thateveryone's kind of clear on terminology.
But the slokas is kind of theverse that these are so the,
and I just wanted to clarify.
So in the book here s slokas andI think there's 72, is that right?
Yeah.
72
Yeah.
72 slokas.
And there's the, the script the devangariand then you break down, and this is

(13:45):
really helpful the Sanskrit terms.
And then there's a sort of a translation,I think, right, of the actual sloka
and then there's the commentary.
Yes.
Is, and, and the question I hadis that commentary is that your
commentary or is that a translationof Ishvarakrishna's commentary?

(14:07):
No.
Ishvarakrishna wrote the slokas,he didn't write the commentary.
Okay.
Okay.
So there were in there, but therewere a number of well known Sanskrit
scholars, some 400, 600 years back.
Like, uh, Vacaspati Misra, they're old.
They all, they all wrotecommentaries on in Sanskrit.
They, they're available.
Okay.
Modern times.
Many people have written,you know, commentaries on in

(14:28):
English or other languages.
But the reason why I wrote this is itis mainly, nowadays, many people are
now studying Yoga Sutras A number ofyoga students are studying Yoga Sutra.
But then Yoga Sutras leave a lot of gaps.
Not, not that they are not, they're done.
What do you call purposelybecause it is already well known.

(14:48):
Where do you find them?
You find them in Samkhya Karika Samkhya.
So Samkhya and yoga, they go hand in hand,So Sanmkhya gives you the theoretical
basis, whereas yoga gives you thepractical means where you are able to
realize what is contained in the SamkhyaKarika So they both go hand in hand.
So even though people study YogaSutras either, there are certain

(15:10):
things that they, they, they arenot able to really appreciate.
So in the olden day, as my teacher,after he taught me the Yoga Sutras,
he said, you must study yoga SankhyaKarika so that you'll have a much
better understanding of the Yoga Sutras.
So from that point of view, peoplewho study Yoga Sutras, you know, of
course Samkhya Karika can be, canbe studied as a standalone text.
We can do that.

(15:31):
But then this is purposely, I wrotethis book purposely for, for people
who study pursue yoga, studentswho studied Yoga Sutras, right?
So from, so what I did was, even somany, if you go through the, the general
commentaries that are available theyare based on the form for develop a

(15:51):
commentary or whatever I told you.
They, they take it from that and write it.
But here, what I want to do was I want tocompare it with the Yoga Sutras, you know,
so that people will be able to understandthe Yoga Sutras better by studying this.
So this is one purpose.
So the, and another thing is.
Another thing is, you see there, I wantedto make use of terms and arguments.

(16:13):
We, so that modern people can understand.
There's no point in repeatingwhatever has been said for four
and five hundred years back wheremany things are taken for granted.
Now, for instance, in the olden days,they'll say they atman or the purusha,
is pure, non-changing conscience.
People will not people willaccept that in the old days.
Nowadays, people ask thequestion, how do you say that?
So I have to explain this.
So what I have done is this isagain, based on how I, what I

(16:36):
learned from me guru, right?
So IIII try to make it accessiblefor modern yoga practitioners so
that they can understand this better.
The ideas are still the sameas containing the whole thing.
Only thing is I wrote it in such a waythat people, modern people will be, so I,
I tried to compare, okay, for instance,I tried to compare the, the in Yoga

(16:58):
Sutras we use the term 'citta vritti'citta vriti, citta vritti is what is.
Many people translate to so manyways citta vritti is what one
kind citta vritti supposing I'mlooking at the world in front of me.
Light particle go through my eyes tohit the, and goes through the brain.
Brain converts them into imagesand is where everything is.

(17:18):
Even according to science.
They say that the, my brainconverts everything into a vision.
The in the, what do you callin the in the visual cortex.
Visual cortex.
So it is still in the mind the sameidea you find in the Yoga Sutras right?
So the the whole idea.
The whole idea is, and then, thenthere they say that whatever is,

(17:41):
so whatever is seen in their mindin the citta is, is citta vritti.
Then that becomes object, which is theone that is seeing this constantly.
The citta vrittis keep on changing,whereas the what do you call,
the, what you call the entitythat is able to observe whatever
is going on in citta vritti iscalled the purusha is the real Self
That is what it says.
Now, Samkhya Karika explained this in,in a much greater detail, so I tried

(18:05):
to bring the both of them togetherso that people, there is a purpose
of writing this book, not merelyanother translation of Yoga Sutras.
So for Samkhya yoga, manypeople have already done that.
I wanted to make this book what Icall more, more and more useful for
yoga people so that they'll be able tounderstand the yoga concept much better.
Yeah, yeah.
Yeah, and I've done this in my teachings.

(18:28):
I had told you in our emailconversations that many years ago
I did a paper on Samkhya and yoga.
So I had a little bit of a background.
And I found your book really helpfulto elucidate some of the information
that I did not have at the timebecause I was reading more, you know,
modern commentaries and explanations.

(18:49):
But let's take a step back.
And look at the philosophy, look at thecosmology that's presented in Samkhya.
And what I'm gonna do is I'm gonnagive you my version of it, and you
can correct me and let me know whereI'm right and where I am incorrect.

(19:09):
So my understanding is Samkhya andyoga here it, it, it's dualistic
in the sense that there is Purusha,which is that pure consciousness.
And then there's prkriti and prkrti Ithink is often translated as nature.
I often think of it as thematerial stuff and then.

(19:35):
And this is one of the questionsis, you know, how does all of
this, you know, how do these twothings start working together?
The way that I understood it is thatPurusha, the analogy is that Purusha
is almost like a flashlight that itturns its attention to the prakrti,

(19:56):
and that sort of wakes up the prakrti,it, it excites it, if you will.
And there are these three gunas, threequalities that are inherent in prakriti.
And that's the sattva
tamas.
yes, yes, yes.
I was saying rajas and tamas.
And then out of those, and we can talka little bit about what those represent.

(20:21):
You get these sort of evolutes of buddhiwhich is intellect, the ahamkara, which
is the ego, and then manas, which is mind.
And we have this mistaken perception.

(20:42):
It seems that we are just prakrti andand I find it fascinating that mind
and intellect aren't seen as part ofPurusha, but they're part of the prakrti.
And the goal is to realizethat what we are is Purusha.

(21:06):
That we are the unchanging,immortal consciousness.
So I'm gonna stop there andlet you correct me and affirm
anything that I got correct.
No, I mean, what you saidis, is perfectly correct.
Okay.
The, the only thing I will probablyput it in a slightly different way.

(21:29):
The, the, what do you call the, thewhole life that might take my own life?
You know, whole life.
I'm the subject.
The rest of the world is object, right?
I'm the subject.
The rest of the world is object.
Okay?
So we go about our life, you know,that, that cannot be changed,
you know, through my life.
I'm the subject.
Now, the, the question that they,they're asking is the, the question is.

(21:51):
I'm the subject.
The outside world is the object.
Now I am aware of the outside world.
I'm aware of the outside world, but I'maware of not only the outside world.
I'm aware also of my, my, my me.
I'm aware of me right atthis particular moment.
I'm aware of the computer in frontof me and the other things around me.
But I am also aware of this,this individual, this Ramaswami
sitting here and talking, right?

(22:13):
So the entity that is aware ofeverything, including the outside world,
and this person is to be the what youcall Purusha, that is the subject.
What is the essential nature of a subject?
The essential nature of the subjectis to be aware of the object, right?
What is the object?
Now the object is not only the out outsideworld, but also that includes this person
because the universe consists of notonly the out outside world, but also this

(22:34):
person as part of the universe, right?.
So the entity that is able to, what youcall to experience everything, the entire
universe, my view of universe, right?
Not, not everybody's, my un, my universeconsiders all the objects outside and also
this individual, as a individual, as partof this universe that, what you call the,
the entity that is aware it is a subject.

(22:55):
That should be called as 'I'.
So there we, what we say is the,what is the essential nature?
Nature of a subject.
It should be aware of the object.
What is the object according to PantajaliYoga Sutra even the outside objects are
there, they are reduced to citta vritti.
My own body.
I'm aware of my own body thatis also reduced to citta vritti.
And all of them put together, there isa article, there's a total presentation,

(23:16):
and that is already we being observed.
We don't really observe the outside world.
So Pantanjali Yoga Sutra reduces thesubject object relation to, into the
non-changing consciousness as a subject,and then the mental projection of
everything that we receive as a object.
So these, the, so in the, inSamkhya, this is not explicitly
said, but where in Pantajali's YogaSutras subject object relations

(23:39):
beautifully, like alchemizedsubject is non-changing Purusha.
And what is object?
Object only citta vritti becauseeverything is reduced into citta
vritti, you know, even regardingscience, everything's reduced to,
what do you call a mental projectionin the, in the, what you call in the
visual cortex or whatever it be, youknow, a complicated process, right?

(23:59):
So, so, so what, what personswould say is, what do we gotta deal
with only the citti vritti right?
Because everything's reduced,which deal with that.
Once you deal with that, then you know,the pure, pure conscious will be free.
It'll not be, it'll not be bothered,bothered by the vagaries of the
outside world or vagaries of my own.
This, this body also.
So this is a slightly differentway of looking at the whole thing.

(24:23):
The whole thing, but that thisis becomes possible only if
you're able to combine and go toSamkhya and Yoga Sutras together.
Samkhya Karika talks aboutthree things to be known.
One, the non-changing pureconsciousness as the Self.
Then the, what you call mulaprakrtifrom the entire universe came, and
then the various levels, stagesin which the evolution took place.
Right.

(24:43):
All these things I've explained.
Ultimately, they also say that the, themain goal of Samkhya, the main goal of
yoga, the main goal of Vedanta, and isto understand what constitutes the Self.
What constitute once, once I understand,I mean my buddhi, my analyzing capability,
my intellect, if it is able to understandthat the non-changing consciousness is
the real self and not the body mind, thewaht do you call body mind, the complexes.

(25:06):
When it is able to do that, then the goalof Samkhya Yoga and balance are achieved.
Okay.
So, one of the questions thatI have and this was one of the.
I, I guess a little bit of a criticismthat I had because it didn't seem
to answer the question for me.

(25:27):
Not what you just said, butI'm referring to the book.
So even stepping back furtherbecause you mentioned the kind of
the creation of the universe, right?
Right.
And you in the book so wehave mulaprakrti, which is the
original source of the universe.
And it's the absolute source ofthe evolved universe, which is

(25:48):
manifest or excuse me, unmanifest.
And it says it exists, but wecannot say where it exists.
And then there is also thisuniversal or cosmic intelligence.
Right.
And the question that I had wasin the text, where there was a few

(26:09):
instances where there were questionsand answers, and one of the questions
was, where does Purusha come from?
Right
And in the answer, I didn't think thatit really answered that question so much.
Where it comes from and is it justthis, and, and, and I'm not sure

(26:33):
if Purusha is connected to thisuniversal cosmic intelligence.
Is it just self existent?
Is it something that we just can't answer?
Where, where, where did that come from?
I mean, and, and let's go by what SamkhyaKarkia is, he has got three things right?
One is Purusha.

(26:55):
Is the term the lower experience, thenthe mulaprkrti and then the what do you
call other 23 evolutes, the whole thing.
Now the, the question, and in factI was a bit a bit what do you call,
very a bit unhappy about the questionitself because this has been dealt
with the beginning itself in thebeginning of Sankhya Karika, but

(27:19):
so far as Purusha is concerned, Purusha,not prakrti, not vritti, Purusha.
That's what the third sloka says.
What does it say?
The Purusha is neither an evolutenor does it produce anything.
So something which does notproduce anything, or it is,
doesn't come from anything else.
It is non changing.
It, it is immortal.
So that is, that ideahas already been given.

(27:41):
Now the, he was asking thequestion, where does it come from?
Where is it coming from?
And then you, you'll have to see.
That the evolution of mulaprakritiinto the various evolutes one
of the evolutes is space, right?
One of the evolutes is space.
That is from mulaprakriti.
Then the mahat, the universalcosmic intelligence.
Then ahamkara the what do callthe universal energy, then

(28:04):
the five tanmatras sensation.
Then the five bhuttainto simple space akasha.
So the question is, Akasha belongsto prakriti, and Purusha has already
been said to be not belonging to this.
So when you, when you saythen this, the question where
from, where did Purusha come?
Because there is, it is not, doesnot belong to space at all, right?

(28:27):
At this particular moment, right?
And then just think of it right at thisparticular moment, as I'm talking, as
I'm talking, there is an awareness ofme talking to you, all these things in
the universe, and which is the one thatis observing, there is the Purusha.
That is a, that is it.
Now you can't, you can't define it.
Because you can't say it is herein my heart and my head No, because
it, you, you are trying to saythat Purusha is in space, but space

(28:49):
itself is an evolute of of prakriti.
Am I clear is so thequestion itself is wrong.
The question was wrong.
Where did it come from?
That question is wrong because weare used to thinking that everything
should come from some space.
But in this case, in this case,there's very, the, the difference
comes difference because space itselfis something which is experienced.

(29:11):
Space is something, and whichis the one that is experiencing
space, that is the Purusha.
So Purusha does not come from any place.
It is by itself.
It is, you know, you know, it isindependent, absolutely independent,
unconnected with anything else.
So that is the answer forthis particular question.
So to explain that, to explainthat I took the trouble to, or
reemphasize the nature of the Purusha.

(29:33):
That's why the answer was not, I, I, atthe same time he said the question was.
Where did, where does whatyou call Purusha come from?
Does it come from prakrti?
That's the question.
So there was, if you see the questionthere, it doesn't stop merely asking.
It doesn't merely ask that where didyou know, where did it come from?
He said, does it come from prakrtiThe question was wrong because

(29:55):
prakrti and Purusha are said tobe different in the beginning.
Said they already told that.
Yeah.
So I told then I, I wanted toexplain to him, I wanted to
explain to him that Purusha isindependent, completely independent.
It has got nothing to do withspace or anything whatsoever.
Unfortunately, our way of thinking, theway of thinking, I mean, modern thinking,
you know, the default thinking everythingshould come from some someplace.

(30:16):
I mean, am I making sense,everything should come from
someplace Purusha does not belongto belong to prakriti or thought.
So.
I mean, so it is, it, it, it,it is not, it is not, it is not
possible to answer this question,where did Purusha come from?
Because Purusha came from nowhere.
It is there all the time.
It is there all the time.

(30:36):
It is non-changing.
See, see, in the Bhagavad Gita,it is explained like this.
See, during our childhood, there arelots of different kind of citta vrittis,
all the childish activities are there.
That is all seen by non-changingPurusha when you become an adult, the
child, the type of activities thatthe main mind goes are different.
But the same Purusha is observing that.
And then when the old age comes, anotherset of what do you call activities go

(30:59):
in the mind, citti vrittia is there,that is also seen by the same Purusha.
So the Purusha does not undergoany change the citta vrittis
they keep on changing, dependingupon the stage of life we are in.
Again, in what you callanother another stage of life.
The, what do you call the consciousnessthat is observing whatever goes on the
waking stage is the one that observeseverything that goes on your dream stage.

(31:20):
So the, the, the thing is when,when there is a dream, the dream is
not by the waking stage person, butby the non-changing consciousness.
So when they say, I got a dream.
See when they have the dream,I'm completely shut up.
There is a, there is a temporarilyparalysis of all the motor activities.
And then the dream, there's anotherwhat called entity, which is,
which is shown as the real me.

(31:41):
I'm 86 years old, I have a dreamand I'm 18 years old there.
So how can 86-year-old have a dreamof the 18-year-old, without objecting?
So these are allcompartmentalized waking states.
So which is the one which is commonin all this thing that is the Purusha.
So by these different types of argument,they try to show that the non-changing

(32:03):
consciousness is entirely differentfrom whatever goes on in the body or
in the mind in the prakritic Self.
So this is what I try to explainin that in the particular question.
Okay.
Is there.
Interaction.
Because the way I initially kindof described my understanding
was that it is the observation ofPurusha that activates prakriti.

(32:28):
And is there any other kind ofinteraction between Purusha and
prakriti, or is it just thatPurusha is simply just observing?
Yes.
According to Samkhya karika yoga,Purusha is just pure consciousness.
Okay.
Suposing at this particular moment, Iknow I've answered your question, right?

(32:48):
Yeah.
The Purusha is merely observing them.
After some time know I will bedoing some other activities,
sometimes very happy, right?
The Purusha knows I'm happy, that's all,or he's experiencing that I'm happy.
Then next moment I'm not happyPurusha experience, I'm unhappy.
Now the whole question, what these peopleare saying is that Purusha not changing.
It never changes, never goes any change.

(33:10):
And then this is thesubtlest aspect in me.
It is subtler subtler even than mybuddhi, even my intellect, right?
So the, the correct thing willbe for my buddhi to identify with
that non-changing conscious asitself and not as, not the body.
Why?
Why is it we are doing it?
We are doing it for, becausethat's how it started.
The whole thing started because of thisignorance about the nature of the self.

(33:32):
So the whole purpose of Samkhya yogaand Vedanta they used to turn the
buddhi from, from thinking body,mind complex itself to the real, not
changing consciousness as the real self.
So that's all their main approach.
There is nothing else Purasha does.
Purusha does not do anything.
It merely observeseverything that is going on.

(33:53):
That's its nature.
It is its nature.
What is the essential natureof Purusha of the subject?
Used to be aware of the object.
What is the object here?
Citta vritti is the object.
So all the time the Purusha isaware of the citta vrittis only.
So instead of, and then citta vrittiskeep on changing, and by and large,
these Samkhya yogis and Vedantists saythe citta vrittis are mostly painful,

(34:14):
that's their observation, I may notagree with that, but by and large they
say the reason, the reason why Samkhyakarika why do you suffer like this?
Why do you suffer like this?
Because the real Purusha, the real self,is absolutely non-changing consciousness.
It doesn't suffer at all.
Why do you want to, why do youthink that you are suffering?
So.
Provided the mind body, the, the thinkingfaculty is able to sit down and think

(34:37):
on these lines and understand thenon-changing Purusha is the real self
and not the, what do you call the ego?
The, the ego that, you know,identification of the body.
You know, that that is themain purpose of Samkhya.
Theoretically, they want to shownon-changing purusha is the consciousness.
Once the buddhi understands andaccepts this fact, the enormous
amount of unnecessary associationwith the body and then suffering like

(34:59):
this will go away according to them.
It may appeal to few people.
It may not appeal to everybody.
So those people for whom thisappeals, then they want to okay.
They, they, they understand what they say.
They read the Yoga Sutra and SamkhyaKarika, they understand what they say.
They sit down and think they understand.
So these are the twolevels of understanding.
One is called, one iscalled what do you call?

(35:20):
One is called knowing throughsomebody else or reading the book.
The second is anumana.
I sit down.
Oh, yes, I understand that.
I understand what they are talking about.
I get to, so these two levels ofunderstanding are, are called what you
call the third level of understandingis I'm, my, my buddhi should be directly
able to see the nature of the Self.
How the, how, how can it be done?
Only in the state of total concentration,which the yogis call samadhi.

(35:43):
How is that I'm able to get into that?
That entire procedure goingto samadhi is explained in the
what you call the Yoga Sutras.
Mm-hmm.
So these two are companion volumes.
The theory is given by Samkhya, whichis taken by what you call yogis.
And then they take to the third stage.
The first stage and second stageis because first stage and second
stage of knowing is one is directlylistening to teacher reading books.

(36:06):
The second stage is sitting down, analyze.
Oh.
Then I realize, okay, what this is,this is logical that understanding, I'm
what do you call convinced about it.
Once this is done, many people are,they keep on talking, explaining, but
yogis say, no, this is not sufficient.
You directly experience that.
Then only the mind will have no desirefor any future, but all the desire

(36:26):
will go away, but that will take place.
You need a, what you callstrong discipline, a mental
discipline that's given by yoga.
So that is why yoga developed to, whatdo you call to, for people to realize
what is explained in Samkhya Karika.
Right.
And then so, so, so they work,they compliment each other.

(36:47):
If you merely study Yoga Sutras,you know, I may not have a complete
understanding of the theory behind it.
So I study both the texts . So in this, inthis to make what we call Samkhya Karika
intelligible to what yoga people, I tryto compare most of these things with the
whatever is contained in the Yoga Sutras.
Yeah.
So.

(37:08):
If I understand correctly, andI'm sorry, a lot of this is just
gonna be, I just wanna make sureI'm understanding things right.
Because you just mentionedsamadhi and samadhi is usually
seen as sort of the goal of yoga.
And my understanding is samadhi is thissort of absorbed contemplation, and

(37:29):
yet in there is kaivalya and kaivalyais, is it fair to say that it is a
sort of a, a, a knowledge, a kind ofgnosis of the purusha of the truth?
Because I'm still a littleunclear as to what might be the
difference between samadhi andkaivalya, if there is a difference.

(37:54):
Samadhi is a means.
Kaivalya is a result.
Alright.
Okay.
And and samadhi itself, samadhi itself isa, what you call a mental state, right?
Mm-hmm.
Normally, our kind mindis constantly distracted.
Or what do you call you know, supposing ittake about five minutes, five minutes, the
way my mind function, it, know it surfs.
What do you call surfs from objectto object, all those it's called

(38:16):
cittia vritti that they call it.
So what yoga tries to do is you tryto make the mind focus on one object
for the duration of time I want tocontemplate upon Take about five minutes.
During five minutes for non yogi people,the mind goes all over the place, right?
Different, different,different train of thought.
You start one thought, thesecond thought is different.
Third, third is different.
Fourth is different.
Fourth has got no connectionwhatsoever with the first thought.

(38:38):
So that's how the normallythe mind functions.
Here, what they try to do is they try tomake the mind focus on only one thing.
Why?
Because very, very difficult for themind to focus on the nature of atman
because it is subtle, it is not obvious.
Right.
So for that to take place, theyneed a very, very concentrated mind.
So the, what do you call the,the, the meditation process itself

(38:59):
is divided into three stages.
First stage called the dharana stage.
What what, what they do is duringeach time in the mind to go all over
the place, they have a focal point.
They bring the mind to thesame point again and again..
Like it maybe a mantra, right?
Maybe a chakra, you know,it may be an icon, whatever.
They bring the mind back to thesame object again and again.
We keep on doing it for a period of time.
Then what happens?

(39:19):
The mind remains with the sameobject for the entire duration of
yoga that stage they call dhyana.
And then when you were, what do youcall it, when you are able to meditate
upon an object for, for, for thosefive, ten and for the duration of
time you are contemplating upon.
If you are able, if you even forgetyour own self, then it's call samadhi.
Mm. Samadhi is a stage where younot only are completely oblivious to

(39:42):
the outside world, you became evenoblivious to your own body and you
mind only the object that you arecontemplating remains in your mind.
If that stage is called,there's called Samadhi, right?
So Samadhi is a stage apparentlyyou are able to contemplate, you
meet me, my buddhi, my buddhi,with a total concentration.
It is able to understand thetrue nature of my own self.
When that take place,the mind comes to a stop.

(40:02):
And that stage is called kaivalya.
Kaivalya is the result,samadhi is the means.
Okay.
Alright.
Thank you for that.
That helps.
One of the things that and again,this is, I wanna make sure that I'm
correct in understanding this is whenwe talk about Purusha and I'm looking
for the quote in the, from the book.

(40:24):
I don't know if I can find it as I want,but it is, i'm just gonna phrase this in
my poor understanding, but it, I thinkthat when we talk about Purusha, there's
this idea often, or that there's like onePurusha and that we're recognizing through

(40:44):
kaivalya that we are this one Purusha.
But my understanding is that there'sindividual Purushas, it's like these,
I always think about it as likethese little bubbles that each of us
has this little bubble of Purusha.
And, and I think in terms of kind ofcomparative terms in difference with,

(41:10):
for example, like Advaita Vedanta wherethe idea is that the atman is Brahman
and that all the various atmans are thisone thing, that there are not all these
individual Brahmans everywhere, but inSamkhya and yoga it's not quite the same.

(41:30):
Do I have that right?
Right.
You are right.
You're perfectly right.
Yes.
I think I mentioned to you that,you know, these three philosophies,
Samkhya, yoga, and Vedanta are,you know, they form one group.
And then they, they are siblingphilosophy, Vedic philosophies, and then
they, their, their goal is the same,which is kaivalya, moksha or you know,
nirvana, whatever you want to call it.

(41:52):
But according to Samkhya and yoga,Samkhya says, if you understand the true
nature of the self, that is kaivalya.
That's all what you need.
Once you know your own truenature of the self, you don't
have to bother about other things.
You don't have to bother about whatis the nature of the self and somebody
else, but some other person are not.
So they say that you,you concentrate upon.
So the first step in all these thingsto know who really you are, and that is

(42:14):
supposed to be what call the real purusha.
And then practically to be ableto achieve this is given by Yoga.
So these two people.
They don't, they, they, they, they manage.
They say, they argue that, you know,if you know, they say that, you know,
each one has got a different lifespan.
Each one has got a different mentalactivities are, are, are later.
Okay?
So some are, some are sattvic,some are rajasic, some are tamasic.

(42:37):
Right?
All so many differences are there.
So there should bedifferent, what do you call?
Different atmans should be there.
But then Vedanta especiallyAdvaita Vedanta, they come and say,
they take one more step, right?
The only experience I have allthrough my life is my citta vrittis.
Nothing else, right?
All the world I know.
The world I know.
See, I say that so many things arehappening in so many different place.

(42:57):
If I'm a, if I'm an astronomer, I'll bethinking about the Milky Way and all that.
On the, on the other hand, if I'm amicrobiologist, I'll be thinking about,
you know, small cells and all that.
If I'm a I, I atomic scientist, I will.
So, likewise, my world is limited to whatI'm doing, what I'm doing right, right.
Now, supposing I say supposing, I'm,I'm saying supposing I say there

(43:18):
are a hundred, there are differentpeople have should, should have
different atmans, and all that.
That is also part of my thinking only.
I do not have any means of understandingwhat is going on in other people.
Right At this particular moment,I see the computer and you.
I see you in the, in the, in the whatdo you call, in the monitor, talking.
Now, all these things are goneto my head, and then only as a
citta vrtiti I'm able to see thatmy world is completely empathic.

(43:41):
I mean, there is nothing, I mean,according to Vedanta there is
nothing like what you call yourworld where a number of people live.
The, what you call, the only, onlyexperience I have is my citta vrittis,
whatever, whatever happens to my mind.
Everything, anything that yousay, suppose you say the world
is big or different philosophy.
There.
All of them come under my own world.
My own, my own.

(44:03):
So that is the case.
There's only one what do youcall, but there's only one only
purusha there is only one Purusha.
And that Purusha is,is the Brahman, right?
There are not, they don't say, thereare no other purushas there is no way
of determining whether there, see, they,they, they compare it to your particular
dream stage, you know?
In Vedanta they compare to dream
stage.
In a dream stage.

(44:25):
In a dream state, what do you see?
Your, your, your new universe is created.
New world is created, new peopleare there, you know, all sorts
of activities are going on.
And then the you wake up.
Once you wake up, what happened?
Everything is gone.
Only you, only the pureawareness is there.
Whatever was aware of is completely gone.
Completely gone.
Right?
So there's no question of askingwhether the people that you saw in the

(44:48):
dream have a different atman or not.
Even, even the, what you call theindividual that you saw, which was
wrongly identified as your own self.
The dream self is not you, butstill at that particular, you
know, you know what I mean?
When I'm having a dream, the numberof people have created in the
dream and, and the mind verticalchooses one of them as myself.

(45:09):
And then acts acts along with that.
So this is how it is happeningin the waking stage also.
They say that the non-changingPurusha , Brahmana Purusha observing
everything that is going on in mycitta, just like a dream stage.
So it is not possible for, it isnot possible for us to, I to say
that other people exist, otherpeople exist independently, and

(45:30):
that they have their own source.
This question cannot be answered.
So the only thing I'm aware of, onlything I can identify is my own self.
And that you know, the, just likethe dream world is created by my own
atman, see it is we create similarlythe idea of what I experience is
created by the Brahman within me.
So they say that Aman andBrahman are one and the same.

(45:51):
So there is a slight difference betweenthe, between God yogis and yogis and
the Samkhyas say, and the Vedantanssay, Vedantans say there is only you.
I mean, I, I don't know whetherI'm making myself clear.
The whole, the whole thing is.
There is no other experience.
There is no other experiencethan whatever I experienced.
Hmm.

(46:12):
Everything.
Supposing I say what?
Supposing somebody says there areyou know, different individuals
have got different atmans, that'swhat the Samkhya Yogis said.
That is part of my own understanding,my own knowledge, my own words.
There's another theorythat's also my own word.
So there is no way by which I, I meansometimes I think on these lines.
Right, right.
I, I have, I have no otherexperience except whatever

(46:35):
is taking place in my mind.
I have no other experience.
I have no other experience.
Right.
So that being the case, they say there'sonly one consciousness, and that one
consciousness Brahman or atman, thatis the view of the Vedantans right.
Okay.
Not that, not that one.
What do you call one?
Brahman went and then divided intohundred and thousands of events.

(46:55):
That's not the way.
You know, ultimately thiswill have to be explained.
Okay.
Alright.
One of the and this kinda gets us thereand this is addressed in the book but
when I first started learning aboutSamkhya and its connection to yoga what
I had read was that the main differenceis that Samkhya is atheistic, whereas

(47:20):
yoga allows for like a personal God.
But in the book it clearly states thatSamkhya never claims to be atheistic.
And so I'm curious whenwe talk about Purusha.
Is Purusha God?
I mean, you had mentioned like bra Braman.

(47:42):
Purusha.
is that fair to say Or is it incorrect?
No.
See the word, the word God weused as a creator, isn't it?
By and large, that'sthe meaning of the word.
God is the wonder whocreated this universe.
In Samkhya, they said mulaprakriti,created the universe and
there is no consciousness.

(48:02):
So nature is capable, nature is capable ofevolving itself into this entire universe.
So they did not bring, they did notfeel it necessary to bring the idea
for God with respect to creation.
So I would, I don't say that Samhyaswere against God or anything.
They did not think it was necessary.
They were able to explain everything,you know, from mulaprakriti,

(48:23):
everything evolved and everythingwill, will go roll back into
mulaprakriti at the time of resolution.
So they didn't find a need to bringin God in this particular case.
I mean that, so we cannot say, Imean, my view is we cannot say that
nowhere have they said that thereis no God, they have not said that.
There is.
They have not said that.
Right.
If you come to, if you come to,what do you call Yoga Sutras,

(48:46):
the word us Ishvara is used butIshvara is not used as a creator.
Ishvara is not used as a creator.
But Ishvara is, used the termIshvara used to indicate a guru.
Yeah.
What call, yeah.
Worshipping Ishvara, you'll be able to getthe true knowledge of, of your own self.
Why?
Because Ishvara and theindividual soul are identical.

(49:07):
So far the essential nature is concerned.
Only thing individual.
Individual you know, consciousindividual Purusha like this because
of the association with the, whatdo you call the karma we keep on
jumping from one birth to another.
But the Ishvara God knows that karma, isnot afflicted that's all the difference.
Even in yoga, the Ishvara is notconsidered as God as a creator.

(49:31):
Even in, see in, in Samkhya, they did notbring the term Ishvara because is God.
Because God is not, God's functionis creation, which is not necessary
because creation is already given tomulaprakriti, so they have not brought it.
They have not, they have notclearly said that there is no God.
When you come to Yoga Sutra,the, the, the Ishvara is used.

(49:53):
God is used, but God is not used asa creator, but as a supreme supreme
consciousness that's about that.
Ultimately, when you go to Vedantaagain, the, what do you call
Brahman, is supreme conscious.
Right?
Though though, we associate the supremeconsciousness with creation, only because
our false understanding of the creation.
So, you know, we, we, we all thethree, all the three, all the three

(50:14):
you could see that you know, they,they, they're not against God.
At the same time, they did not find itnecessary to bring in God to explain
what ever philosophy they are explaining.
Yeah.
Yeah.
I, yeah, and I don't necessarily, whenI think of God, you know, the first
question I always ask is, you know,whenever someone talks about God, I'm

(50:35):
like, well, what do you mean by that?
Because I don't necessarilyassume God as creator.
And what comes to my mind, a yes,kind of a, an analogy right from
Western philosophy is with thesort of the idealism of George
Bishop George Berkeley, which is thatyou know, for Berkeley, everything

(50:58):
is occurring within consciousness.
That's what we mean by idealism.
Right, right, right, right.
And the question was, you know, youknow, his famous phrase, but you
know, to be is to, to perceive as,to be, to be, is to be perceived.
And, you know, the questionwas, well, what happens if
something is not being perceived?
You know, it's the old question,you know, if a tree in the forest

(51:20):
falls, does it make a sound?
Well, one answer is, well, itdoesn't unless there's someone
there to perceive the sound.
Right, right, right, right.
And Berkeley's response wasthat God perceives all things.
Right.
And so it seems to me thatthat's a analog to Purusha.
That Purusha is just the perceiver,
Right

(51:40):
it's the consciousnessthat perceives all things.
Right.
Yeah.
I mean, I understand that, youknow, in the, Vedanta Brahman is the
ultimate consciousness and everythingthat is created within is within
that extreme conscious, the, the,what do you call, Brahman itself.
But only thing they say is what iscreated within that consciousness is only

(52:01):
what do you call, is really illusion.
It is not real.
Right, right.
So yeah, there are three aspectsin, in every object that we see
in name, form and substance.
Right, right.
You can see the computer.
There's a substance in it.
It is got the name, it has got aform according to the Upanishads.
Everything that is created in theconsciousness itself is, is made up of

(52:21):
only of name and form, no substance to it.
Because, because Brahman has got no,no capacity to produce any material.
There's no, it can't produce any material.
Just like in a dream, we can produce yourdream, but we can't produce substance.
The, when you have a dream, everythingappears to have a lot of material, right?

(52:41):
You have a lion that runs, there's a tree.
All of them have substance appearto be, but you know, really
there's no substance in it.
So likewise, they say that the, theentire creation is only an illusion, but
it takes place within the, the Brahman.
So, so if I'm able to say that Brahmanand I are one of the same, all the
activities that are going on in me,everything in the outside world, as I told

(53:03):
you, is taking place only is in my mindas a citta vritti, and then that citta
vritti, and that is taking place in, in myconsciousness, my what you call Brahman.
So everything is reduced to, whatdo you call one consciousness.
Only one consciousness.
And in that one consciousnessthat is the what do you call with
which I'm now associated, thiswill operate to everybody else.
It'll operate everybody else.

(53:24):
Right?
So each one.
Each one.
That's it.
I mean, what I'm trying to say is itdoesn't admit that there are a number
of other people are there, because in myworld, I have only my thought processes
are there I, I don't see anything otherthan that how much I maybe wanted to say,
okay, everything other people are there.
I mean, all of them come to my own mind.
It's all in my own world.

(53:44):
In my own world, all these thingsare, these are taking place in my own
consciousness according to Vedanta, aretaking place in my own consciousness.
So, and then they don'thave substance, right?
Once it comes to my mind, supposingI see the computer need me according
both science and what do you call yoga?
Everything goes to my brain.
The brain is converting everything intoan image and I'm only seeing an image.

(54:05):
I means the Purusha inme, not not Rmaswami.
The Purusha in me is seeing that oncethat is done, then the the Vedantists
say everything that is taking place.
It is taking place only in, in, in,in, in one conscious that consciousness
should be called the Brahman.
And then there's no substance to it..There's no, because there's no substance.
Right?
No material.
There only, only, onlyform and names are there.

(54:28):
So the, yeah, I, I don'twhether I made it clear.
Yeah, I think so.
I mean, it's difficult to talk about a lotof this because it's, you know, the, the
term that's often used is it's ineffable.
That some things aresomewhat indescribable.

(54:49):
But we try to, and yeah, and, and,and sometimes it's just a matter
of our language, you know, it'slike when for example, you know,
it's like the Purusha in me, butyou can't really say that, can you?
Because, you know, Purushadoesn't exist in space.
So Purusha can't be in anything.
It seems to be this sort of

(55:10):
No, in yoga and yeah, in yoga and inyoga and what do you call Samkhya?
Purusha is, but in, in, inVedanta it is if it is called
Brahman, and then everythingtakes place with the Brahman only,
yeah, yeah.
Within the Brahman only is taking place.
And as, as I mentioned to you, alright,see if you really look at the, the
Yoga Sutras and as I told you thatall of our life is that I am the

(55:34):
subject, the outside world is object.
Now he says the subject is non-changingpure consciousness, not Ramaswami.
And then the object is not the outside.
It is only citta vritti so hereduce everything and citta
vritti has got no substance.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
I don't see the outside.
I don't see the outside world at all.
I don't see it means whymy by Purusha does not see,

(55:56):
Yeah.
Right.
I also, the Ramaswami also belongsto the prakriti, so How, how,
how do, how do I know me, my, howdoes my Purusha understand me?
Because what you call my, thenew numerous nerves in me sending
send impressions to my brain.
My, my brain is able to reconvert mywhole body in terms of the other image.
That's what you see.
That's what you experience.

(56:16):
So if that is the case, right, if that isthe case, then absolutely what Vedantans
says it becomes perfectly correct, right?
There is no real creation.
There is absolutely no,no real, real creation.
Since what?
There's no substance.
There are forms created.
There are names created.
That's why in the Upanishads entirecreation is only made up of name and form.

(56:38):
There's no substance to it.
But when we see substance,that's perfectly alright.
But then we, we are going to stepto take one more step out of it.
How do we see the outside objects?
How do we see the objects outside?
Both what you call both signs and what youcall yoga and Samkhya say that the object,
whatever, we, even though the outsideobjects may be real or not, what we see

(56:58):
is only an impression, only a projectionof the mind because everything is
converted into a projection of the mind.
And then, so Pantanjali takesthe whole thing is the subject is
Purusha the object is citta vrtitti,and the subject is not Ramaswami.
The outside world is not the, is notthe, what do you call, is not the object.
That's the biggest, what you call biggest,uh uh, I mean, what shall you say?
Biggest revelation.

(57:19):
Revelation of Yoga Sutras thatreduces subject and object.
Ramaswami subject outside worldobject is reduced to Purusha is the
subject citta vritti is the object.
Now I have got a deal onlywith the citti vritti hereafter
once I'm convinced about it.
And then as I told you, both scienceand the Yoga Sutras say we don't see
the objects as the outside world per se.

(57:40):
The eyes don't see the objects per se.
Everything goes to the brain.
And then we, we, we just to put, how do wesee, just ask the question or Google it.
Say we don't see the objects, we only,the information goes to the brain.
It is reconverted and then it isprojected is in the mind into the
what call in the visual cortex.
So if I'm able to pay more attentionthere, then the Yoga Sutras Sanmkhya

(58:03):
and Vedanta become more and morewhat call more and more accessible.
And also you'll, you'll startrealizing that that is the truth.
That is the truth.
Hmm.
Yeah.
Yeah.
It, it, it's fascinating and I alwaysfind value in yoga and Samkhya and I
love how it is different from a lotof the Western philosophies, but I

(58:30):
think it resolves a lot of questionsfrom Western philosophy like that
ongoing mind body problem in a sense.
But it, it takes us to just thisobserver, this, it's the pure, so
Purusha is like the pure, not justpure consciousness, but pure subject.

(58:52):
Yeah.
Pure subject, right?
Yeah, actually, I mean, the, theonly reason why I wanted to write
this particular book was okay, I, youknow, try to make it as accessible as
possible, you know, and then my, myunderstanding of the whole philosophy,
Samkhya yoga and Vedanta, they are,they are speaking the truth, right?
Mm-hmm.
They speak the truth, right?

(59:14):
Only thing is because of the languageor the way we are, we normally go about
thinking this, and then the guess thebiggest, what you call contribution
that is made about this is why YogaSutras, the subject is the non-changing
consciousness object is citta vritti.
And then even if you go according toscience, we don't see objects per se.
Everything is goes to the mind, andthe mind is converting everything in.

(59:37):
And then it is a whole thingis projected in mental space.
Right.
So if you are able to accept, andthe next questions can be asked, they
don't, science does not go beyond that.
The, these people, these Samkhya yogisand the others go beyond that, right?
They go beyond that.
So if you're able to accept, youaccept that is why in the book, I
tried to compare it with the, what,what science also says, right?
Mm-hmm.
Because people are, we will be moreconvinced science says, because it's also

(01:00:01):
logical what science says is logical.
And what I want to say is whatSamkhya yogi and Vedanta say
also very, very logical, right?
Yeah.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
And you addressed thelogic in the book too.
I, I recall that.
And, and I think it's important, you know,
I don't know, just a minute.
I don't see you at all.
Oh I don't know.
I'm still here.
I still see you and hear you.

(01:00:23):
Okay.
Right.
Okay, then.
Yeah.
But what I was saying is that rightnow in Western philosophy and western
science too, the big question isconsciousness and you know, what is
it where, you know, things like that.
And I always find that the Indianphilosophies, and I always make an
appeal to Samkhya and yoga that we needto bring them into the conversation

(01:00:48):
because they have something veryimportant to say that you know, they've
been exploring, you know, you know, theIndian gurus and philosophers have been
exploring consciousness for thousandsof years now, and we in the West, we're
just now starting to ask the question.
And instead of looking at, youknow, brain scans and whatnot, I

(01:01:09):
always want to say, just sit downand meditate for a little bit.
You know, maybe that's the place we needto begin and in our own experiences.
Right.
My, my feeling is that, you know, evenscientists are, they got an open mind.
They must, they must what doyou call they must try to find
out what these Samkhyans and theyogis Vedantans have to say, right?

(01:01:33):
Rather than merely saying, you know,no they after all, only thing is.
If we, if we can explain Samkhya yoga andVedanta in a more logical way, I think
we got a good meeting ground, right?
Unfortunately, most of the old texts, wereused, were written in the old language
and then many of the many of the ideaswere what do you call, but taken for
granted, now we gotta explain everything.

(01:01:54):
Otherwise, you know, modernscientific mind will not accept that.
So the, the modern philosophers, right,yogis or Vedantans Have to come down and
then try to explain them in a more logicalway, more logical way, rather than merely
saying that that's what the old text said.
And it is possible.
If it is true, it should be possibleto explain in a logical way.
That's what I try to do in the book.

(01:02:14):
That's what I try to do in the book.
Right?
Try to make it as as reasonable.
As reasonable or logical as possible.
Yeah.
Yeah.
So that's why sometimes you find thatI've used examples from modern, you
know, our day to day experiences, eventhough that may not be exactly what
what you find in the old text, right.
If you can't merely rely upon oldtext, then that case we'll be just

(01:02:35):
giving lectures and lectures andother, they gotta explain everything
in so that the modern mind canunderstand to the extent possible.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Well, I think that you did aremarkable job with the book
and I'm very grateful for it.
You know, I have a deep abiding interestin Indian religion and philosophy and
you know, I've read and taught the YogaSutras and I find the Samkhya Karika

(01:02:59):
that you've done here an invaluableaddition to our understanding of
what is a very complex system thatis not very well known in the West.
Yes.
So, I thank you for that.
And I think that it's the way youpresented the book, it's just remarkable.
Especially with the Sanskrit.
You know, Sanskrit is a veryunderappreciated language, I think,

(01:03:22):
because it allows for so much nuance thatwe miss in a lot of our Western languages,
even though we're grounded in Sanskrit.
But I know that we arepretty much outta time.
But let me ask you the final questions.
What do you have coming up next?
What are you, what areyou gonna be working on?

(01:03:43):
I, I, I, I am, I enterwriting on one more book.
I think well, either, Ithink I'm halfway through.
One is on, one is on what doyou call for yoga students.
Another one is Yoga Sutrasfor yoga students actually.
My whole idea is to make you know,the yoga practitioners get more and
more interested, interested in thephilosophical aspects of it, so that

(01:04:06):
they get a more complete pictureof the, of the whole system, right.
So not only physical exercise is good,pranayama is good, but also understanding
the various nagging questions in our mind,which we are don't, we don't even ask.
So, you know, slowly people,people can get interested more.
These philosophies are we easily,what shall we say it is for everybody.

(01:04:27):
You know, every human beingcan find something useful in
these philosophies, right?
Even though it was a return in the oldVedas, you know, it's, I think it is
beyond there, there, there is no religiousaspect of religion or anything in it.
It is only logical, reasonable whatdo you call arguments are there.
So that's what I'm trying to do.
And then the next I'm alsodoing a program you know, in,

(01:04:49):
in September at Salt Lake City.
Utah, I'll be teaching about 60 hoursvinyassakrama system and 20 hours
for Samkhya Karika word by word andanother 20 hours for Yoga Sutras.
So these are the programs I'm thinking.
I'm now in India.
I'm planning to come to US inAugust and then do some programs.

(01:05:12):
Okay.
Do you have a webpage for wherepeople can go to keep track of your
programs and your upcoming books?
Yeah.
Yeah.
I have a website vinyasakrama.com oryeah, I can probably email to you these
particulars if it is okay with you.
Okay.
Yeah, please.
And what I'll do is I'll put thewebsite and links for the book in the

(01:05:35):
show notes, in the video description.
So I would encourage anyone whopractices yoga like you said, you
know, yoga is not just the way Iphrase it is, yoga is not just about
getting bendy or being in shape.
There's so much more to it than thephysical aspect that so many in the
western world kind of think of that thereis this deep abiding philosophy to it.

(01:06:00):
And I am very appreciative of your effortsto bring that philosophy out, you know, so
that more people can know about it becauseit is incredibly important, I think.
So I, I just.
Please go ahead.
Yeah, I, I be, before we close, Ijust wanted to thank you for this
opportunity and one thing is thank youfor these really probing questions.

(01:06:22):
You know, I've just been wanting to talkon these lines and thank you so much for.
You know, you askingthese wonderful questions.
Thank you so much.
Oh, well, thank you.
I mean, it's it was an awesomeopportunity for me to ask someone
who knows these questions.
Because my approach is, youknow, I want to understand.
And so I am so grateful for thetime I had with you today and the

(01:06:44):
ability to ask you these questions.
So, very deep thank you from me.
So thank you.
Thank you very much.
And that's a wrap on episode199 of Rebel Spirit Radio.
Thank you so much for listeningor watching if you're part
of my YouTube audience.
As always, if you enjoyed thisepisode, please hit that like button if
you're watching on YouTube, and don'tforget to subscribe to the channel

(01:07:07):
and click that notification bell.
You can also follow Rebel SpiritRadio on whatever audio platform
you use for listening to podcasts.
Right now I'm nearing 20,000 downloadson the audio platforms, yet I only have
12 followers, and one of those is me.
It only takes a second to likefollow or subscribe, and it is
totally free and it really does help.

(01:07:30):
Putting together this podcast isa labor of love, and I do love it.
I put a lot of effort and time intoeach episode, so if you find value
in the conversations I providehere, I hope you can find it in your
heart to send a little love my way.
With more subscriptions andfollowers, I could possibly get some
sponsorship, and honestly, havingsome funds come my way to help with

(01:07:52):
equipment hosting and other necessarysubscriptions would be really helpful.
You can also help by joining myPatreon at patreon.com/rebelspirit.
The link is also in theepisode description.
You can also buy a super thanks onYouTube to help support my work.
As I always say, I'm here in the frontrange now doing missionary work in regards

(01:08:14):
to religion, spirituality, and ecology,consciousness, the esoteric and how
all of this can help us heal humanity'ssacred relationship with the living earth.
So if you feel moved by the rebel spiritand you know I sure hope that you do,
then please by all means, help me inmy efforts to share the good news.

(01:08:34):
I'm Nick Mather and you've been listeningto or watching Rebel Spirit Radio.
Until next time, may be in peace, mayflourish in all possible ways, and may
you continue to nurture your rebel spirit.