“Tricycle” magazine described the boom of LSD during the 1960s as blowing the generation gap wide open. They described it as “the old were appalled while the young were enthralled.” In his manuscript for Flashbacks Leary wrote, “Some students quit school and pilgrimage eastward to study yoga on the Ganges. Not necessarily a bad development from our point of view but understandably upsetting to parents who did not send their kids to Harvard to become Buddhas” (Fields 1).

LSD stands for Lysergic Acid Diethylamide. The synthetic hallucinogenic drug was discovered by accident in 1938 by Swiss chemist Albert Hoffman. Hoffman was so taken aback by the immediate and profound distortions caused by LSD that he penned his experience immediately after his “trip.”

“I was forced to stop my work in the laboratory… and to go home, as I was seized by a particular restlessness associated with the sensation of mild dizziness. On arriving home, I lay down and sank into a kind of drunkenness which was not unpleasant and which was characterized by extreme activity of imagination. As I lay in a dazed condition with my eyes closed (I experienced daylight as disagreeably bright) there surged upon me an uninterrupted stream of fantastic images of extraordinary plasticity and vividness and accompanied by an intense, kaleidoscope-like play of colours. This condition gradually passed off after about two hours.” (Nevid 328)

LSD affects the user by decreasing the affect of serotonin in the brain. Because serotonin normally acts as a neurotransmitter that inhibits neural activity, a decrease in serotonin causes brain activity to escalate. The resulting increase in brain activity produces major sensory distortions, including changes in color perception and hearing. Users often claim that LSD “expands consciousness and opens new worlds – as if they were looking into some reality beyond the usual reality” (Nevid 328). Leary hypothesized that LSD doesn’t actually alter reality in so much that it allows the user to see reality as it truly exists. This is not terribly different from the Yogacara philosophy branch of Buddhism that discusses how the mind is empty and reality as it is seen is actually an illusion. Leary’s idea that LSD enables users to see reality as it truly exists is similar to what Buddhists call “Thusness” or “Ultimate Reality.” The psychedelic experience is described as being beyond the users in that it cannot be put into language or mental constructs. Leary often opined that that while science had the benefit to develop a specific language used to communicate across the board from one scientist to another, no such set of language exists for the psychedelic experience (Leary 24).

As such, it is often difficult to explain what occurs during an LSD trip. Like Hoffman’s experience after accidentally discovering acid in his laboratory, users typically describe vivid colors and sounds coming in what some have described as “waves”.

The psychedelic experience draws many parallels between sensory deprivation, yoga exercises, disciplined meditation, and many religious or aesthetic ecstasies. Leary theorized that the actual drug does not produce the “transcendent experience”; LSD merely acts as the chemical key to opening the mind (Leary 11).

Leary himself had his first psychedelic experience after tripping acid in Mexico in 1960. His familiarity with Buddhist and Eastern studies began while attending West Point Military Academy in Massachusetts. There, he used his time in punitive isolation to study Eastern texts. Leary said his time at West Point was comparative to studying in a yoga monastery (Unknown Author 1).

As a psychologist and professor at Harvard University, Leary expanded his ideas of the useful nature of LSD. He gave acid to inmate volunteers and found the drug useful in the treatment of alcoholism and schizophrenia. His controversial work was decidedly unpopular with his colleagues and Harvard refused renewal of his contract with the Ivy League university. Leary continued his experiments with psychedelic drugs, including LSD and mescaline. He wrote several books on his studies including High Priest Psychedelic Prayers of the Tao Te Ching, Your Brain is God, and The Politics of Ecstasy

In 1962, Leary, along with Ralph Metzner and Richard Albert, adapted the Bardo Thodol of The Tibetan Book of the Dead to write The Psychedelic Experience The book, which has since been translated into seven languages and sixteen editions, was meant to show the correlation between LSD and The Tibetan Book of the Dead Because the original manual was meant to acquaint a dying person with the liberation of the Clear Light of Reality, Leary said it was easy to recast that theory with the death of the ego during a psychedelic trip. He wrote the manual with the intention “that acid, in conjunction with the manual’s guide, could be used to direct and control awareness in such a way to reach that level of understanding called liberation or enlightenment” (Leary 45). This is comparative to the way many practitioners of Buddhism use mediation in an attempt to reach Nirvana.

Leary actually guided his friend Aldous Huxley through the psychedelic experience

while Huxley was dying of cancer. Years before, Huxley had read parts of The Tibetan

Book of the Dead to his first wife as she was dying of cancer. He repeated the instructions into her ear even after she had stopped breathing, all the while saying, “Let go, let go. Go forward into the light. Let yourself be carried into the light’ (Fields 1).

Huxley had his own experiences with hallucinogenics while participating in experiments with mescaline in Los Angeles in May of 1953. During his experience, Huxley remembered a line from one of D.T. Suzuki’s essays, “What is the Dharma Body of the Buddha?” and said he found the answer: The hedge at the bottom of the hill. “What had previously seemed only a vague pregnant piece of nonsense was no clear as day. Of course, the Dharma Body of the Buddha was at the hedge at the bottom of the garden, he wrote in The Doors of Perception (Fields 1).

Still Huxley remained skeptical about the experience. “I am not so foolish to equate what happens under the influence of mescaline with the realization of the end and ultimate purpose of human life: Enlightenment” (Fields 1). Instead, Huxley chose to call it a “gratuitous grace.”

Leary, on the other hand, saw the psychedelic experience as a life-changing one. He advised readers that the only way to hold onto what they learn during a psychedelic session was to extend those principles to everyday life. This is Leary’s famous, “turn on, tune in and drop out” advocacy.

TURN ON -’The turned on person realizes that s/he is not an isolated, separate social

ego, but rather one transient energy process hooked up with the energy dance around hir” (Leary 86). To turn on, Leary said it was important to not let the psychedelic experience stop even after the LSD has worn off.

TUNE IN – ‘Tune in means to arrange your environment so that it reflects your state of

consciousness, to harness your internal energy to the flow around you” (Leary 86). To tune in, Leary recommends changing your dress and housing to reflect your newly “turned on” point of view.

DROP OUT – “Walk, talk, eat, drink like a joyous forest-dwelling god” (Leary 87).

Leary theorized that if everyone turned on, tuned in, and dropped out, there would be grass growing on Wall-Street in less than one year.

The main thrust of Leary’s argument in applying a book meant for the dying is the loss of the ego during a psychedelic experience. The ego is Leary’s term for self. Without the ego, the user has no sense of self. Leary hypothesized that to reach pure awareness, or enlightenment, the user has to remove themselves from the “game,” referring to the roles, rituals and rules defined by society.

The process begins by the user preparing themseif for an actual session by reading material on the psychedelic experience. Then comes the actual taking of the LSD. LSD is an orally ingested drug, usually blotted onto paper or sugar cubes. The drug begins to take affect 30 to 60 minutes after being ingested. The effects of the LSD depend largely on dosage, and as Leary emphasized, setting.

“Immediate set refers to expectations about the session itself. People naturally tend to impose personal and social perspectives on any new situation. For example, some ill-prepared subjects unconsciously impose a medical model on the experience. They look for symptoms, interpret each new sensation in terms of sickness/health, and, if anxiety develops, demand tranquilizers.” (Leary 58)

Some of the side-effects of ingesting LSD include the following: Nausea Trembling, shaking Clammy coldness-which the Tibetans call water-sinking-into-fire Feelings of body melting Body Pressure-which Tibetans call earth-sinking-into-water

Leary wrote that these physical reactions should be avoided as signs of illness, but rather “the consciousness moving around in the body and the onset of ego loss” (Leary Dudjom Rinpoche, a great yogi scholar, once said, “if you see something horrible, don’t cling to it. If you see something beautiful, don’t cling to it.” This idea of refusing to hold onto anything reinforces the Buddhist perspective of impermanence; That nothing is forever. This idea is reinforced in the original Tibetan Book of the Dead and the idea of “samsara”-the endless cycle of birth and rebirth.

Another researcher of Buddhism and LSD, Terence McKenna, said that the links even go so far as compassion and awareness. McKenna spent 25 years studying the ontological foundations of shamanism and spiritual transformation. In an April 1996 interview with “Tricycle” magazine, McKenna said the psychedelic society easily fit into the notion of Buddhist practices.

“Well, compassion is the central moral teaching of Buddhism and, hopefully, the central moral intuition of the psychedelic experience. So at the ethical level I think these things are mutually reinforcing and very good for each other. Compassion is what we lack. Buddhism preaches compassion. Psychedelics give people the power to overcome habitual behaviors. Compassion is a function of awareness. You cannot attain great awareness without attaining greater compassion, whether you’re attaining this awareness through Buddhist practice or psychedelic experience.” (Hunt-Badiner 1). The “habitual behaviors,” as McKenna described them, are what Leary refers to as the “game”- the system of roles and rules the ego goes through on a daily basis. It is perhaps because of the roles and rituals already so thoroughly reinforced by Leary’s time that his ideas were met with such intense scrutiny and dismay. He was often accused of advocating LSD “for kicks” and thought to be the pied piper of a whole generation hell bent on drug use.

“When I’m accused of promoting the use of LSD for kicks, I wonder what they mean by “kicks.” To me the kick means an ecstatic revelation… In any sane society, the word kick could be the ideal, the ecstasy, it means going beyond, getting out of your mind, confronting God. A confrontation with divinity, your own higher intelligence, is going to change you, and some people don’t want to change.” (Leary 96). Instead, Leary said the aim of taking LSD was to open up the user philosophically, increase intelligence, and increase sensitivity. The idea of being led to a higher state of consciousness has even simpler roots in Buddhist practice as evinced by a story Leary recounts of when he was in prison:

“When I was studying mammalian theology at Folsom prison in 1973, it was my custom, during the clear, blue-sky, desert-hot summer months, to walk barefoot in the prison yard. One day the leader of the Hell’s Angels, his name was James “Fu” Griffin, approached me.

“Hey man,” he said, “how come you walk barefoot in the prison yard? Don’t you know that’s dangerous?” We were the best of friends and his question was solicitous, not hostile. He wanted nothing but the best for me.

“Why is it dangerous?” I asked.

“Well you’re exposed. Like to germs and all. You know all these animals spit on the ground here.”

“Yeah, I know. But here’s how I look at it. When you walk barefoot, like undefended, you are very alert about where you put your feet. I’m more alive, like a wild animal, when I’m barefoot. A And, come to think of it, I believe it would be better if more prisoners here stopped spitting on the yard and joined me walking barefoot.”

“I see what you mean,” said James “Fu” Griffin.

He subsequently got a degree in anthropology from Berkeley and later became a Country-Western promoter in San Francisco.” (Leary 23)

Aside from the obvious Buddhist theme of walking barefoot and being “in tune” with your surroundings, another subtler connection can be found between the previous mentions of the links between the psychedelic experience and Buddhism in terms of awareness and compassion. “If we all stop spitting, we can all use it,” Leary said. What Leary is perhaps really saying is that if everyone had the benefit of seeing reality through the lens of the psychedelic experience, maybe everyone would change the way they live. “If everyone in Manhattan were to “turn on” and “tune in,” grass would grow on First Avenue and tieless, shoeless divinities would dance or roller-skate down the carless streets. Ecological consciousness would emerge within 25 years. Fish would swim in a clear-blue Hudson” (Leary 87).

Unfortunately, society at large reduced Leary’s ideas to a hipster fantasy and never truly took the psychologist seriously. John Perry Barlow, co-founder of the Electric Frontier Foundation, reasoned that “the public terror of LSD is based more on media-propagated superstition than familiarity with its effects on the real world” and that even “regular” citizens who have dropped acid are quick to dismiss the benefits of LSD. LSD promotes manipulating reality, rather than accepting it, Barlow said. “LSD is not illegal because it endangers your sanity. LSD is illegal because it endangers control” (Barlow 1). Even the 25 million Americans who have taken LSD would be somewhat hesitant to admit even taking the drug, let alone contributing any sort of positive change to it.

It is because of this existing hostile environment that the use of LSD continues to be done in secret. Many continue to use acid in secret as a sacrament, much like the earliest Tantric circles in India who transformed such taboo substances such as meat and wine into sacraments (Fields 4). Leary even tried to formalize a religion around the use of LSD for legal purposes, even though he shunned the idea of organized religion all together. He attempted to found the “League for Spiritual Discovery” as a means to legalize the use of LSD in the context of religious purposes. After all, Catholic priests were still afforded the right to use wine as a sacrament during prohibition. The idea never came full-circle.

As such, practitioners who use LSD in the context of furthering spiritual development must do so in secret. They say the benefits of such practices far outweigh any stigma of being seen as a “acid drop-out.”

Said one Buddhist practitioner, Myton J. Stolaroff, “In learning to hold my mind empty, I became aware that other levels of reality would more readily manifest. It was only in absolute stillness that many subtle but extremely valuable nuances of reality appeared. I found this effect to be greatly amplified while under the psychedelic substance. This, in turn, intensified my daily practice” (Fields 4).

It is highly worth mentioning, as Leary often emphasized, that the idea of promoting LSD as a means of reaching spiritual awareness, must be done with utmost care and consideration. All throughout The Psychedelic Experience as well as his other texts, Leary continually reinforced the idea of having a guide and understanding the context of what you were doing.

It could be argued that the children who dropped LSD in the 1960s contributed to a decade of confusion and conflict. It could also be argued that those same children grew up and went on to found such things as the internet and continually build society to the way it is today.

This was not just doing drugs just to do drugs. This was a group of scholars, researchers, and psychologists who thought they found a way to change the world, and if not the world, than at least it’s consciousness.

Works Cited

Barlow, John Perry. “Liberty and LSD.” Tricycle Magazine April. 1996.

Hunt-Badiner, Allan. “Sacred Antidotes, an Interview with Terence McKenna.” Tricycle

Magazine April. 1996.

Fields, Rick. “A High History of Buddhism.” Tricycle Magazine April. 1996. Leary, Timothy. The Politics of Ecstasy Berkeley, California: Ronin Publishing, 1980.

Leary, Timothy. Your Brain is God Berkeley, California: Ronin Publishing, 1988.

Leary, Timothy, Ralph Metzner, and Richard Alpert. The Psychedelic Experience A

Manual Based on the Tibetan Book of the Dead New York, New York: Kensington Publishing, 1964.

Nevid, Jeffrey, Spencer Rathus, and Beverly Greene. Abnormal Psychology in a

Changing World New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 2000.

Unknown Author, Internet Source. “Timothy Leary, Biography, Beatland.”

http://www.spress.de/beat-generation/

Related

• The “Pure Consciousness Experience”

Introduction

If atman is brahman in a pot (the body), then one need merely break the pot to fully realize the primordial unity of the individual soul with the plentitude of Being that was the Absolute.[1]

In the above quote, which paraphrases the Chandogya Upanisad (6.8.7), David Gordon White draws on a useful analogy for one beginning a study of what has come to be known as “yoga”. The absolute, brahman, is “bottled up” within the human body, wherein it becomes identified as atman. It is the human body here that becomes the seat or vehicle of sacrifice and the human soul becomes the indwelling Absolute. The action of breaking, or removing the walls that contain human consciousness so as to bring about a “union” of the individual self (jivatman) with the supreme self (paramatman), is the goal or purpose of the practice of yoga, and, it would seem, this is only possible through the body. The body becomes the mediating vehicle, or mesocosm, which stands between the individual, human world order (microcosm) and absolute, cosmic reality (macrocosm). This monistic vision implies a boundless unity between the individual and the world, or the microcosm and the macrocosm. This monistic philosophy, which became known as Vedanta (lit. “The end of the Vedas), transformed the dualistic Vedic worldview, wherein there was a sharp break between the human order and the cosmic order, which only sacrifice (the mesocosm) could bridge. White notes that, “it was likely the concrete experience of yoga that gave rise to this mystical and monistic vision”[2], wherein all apparent oppositions and disjunctures between the human and divine, male and female etcetera, become consumed through the fires generated by yogic sadhana, or austerities (tapas), conceived of as the internalization of the sacrifice.

Despite the apparent singularity of this vision of “union”, it is important to assert that yoga is a complex, multifaceted phenomenon that embraces a number of spiritual paths and orientations. “It” cannot be properly understood as a monolithic system, but rather as a tradition that has been developing for several millennia in India. Its goal and means have been expressed variously and have developed within numerous, often contrasting theoretical frameworks with occasionally incompatible goals.[3] To this effect, Ian Whicher writes:

In its long complex evolution Yoga can be seen as a vast tradition (or rather as several traditions within a tradition) that has incorporated a diverse and rich body of teachings within Hinduism and indeed other religious traditions over a period of many centuries.[4]

As such, classical or raja yoga, which is the name often attributed to the philosophical system that has developed around Patanjali’s Yoga-Sutras (ca. 2nd-3rd CE) and its commentarial literature, was preceded by many generations of investigation into the possibilities for self-transcendence and ultimate freedom (moksa).[5] With the appearance of the Yoga Sutras, however, yoga achieved philosophical maturity (somewhere in the classical period; ca. 150-800 CE). Panini’s text “provided a foundational text on the formal philosophical system of yoga”.[6] The Sutras provide its readers with progressive stages of physical and mental training to break the boundaries that confine one’s sense of self to the conditional, samasaric realm and to evoke a radical identity shift or change in perspective—from that of the mortal ego-personality to that of the immortal self. Through the successive unfolding of the various stages of Patanjali’s astanga yoga, the practitioner unravels the layers of ignorance and delusion that bind purusa (the absolute, supreme Self and conscious observer) from prakrti (the phenomenal world/matter).

The Yoga Sutras is a pivotal text in the formulation of what has come to be called “orthodox yoga”. As a foundational text, it is constantly referred to as a source of inspiration or as the text which best encapsulates and defines the final goal or purpose of yoga, whatever form it may come in. Nevertheless, the dualist, metaphysical framework from which Patanjali’s yoga emerged, namely the Samkhya school of philosophy, has caused many students and scholars of yoga to distinguish between it and later, and especially tantric developments of yoga.[7] Upanisadic speculation into the nature of the universe and the relation of the individual soul to it inspired new forms of yoga (e.g. jnanayoga, bhaktiyoga, etc.), which had monistic metaphysical frameworks as their basis. Tantric metaphysics carried this to its logical conclusion: imploding body (microcosm), individual soul (mesocosm), and divine soul (macrocosm), into one. It also developed concrete and coherent methods, like Laya, Kundalini and Hatha yoga[8], for the return of being (atman) in to essence (brahman). As the human body itself is the seat of the sacrifice and the locus of the absolute, it was to the physical, “this-worldly” capacities of humankind that the architects of Hindu tantrism turned. It is through the physical body and yogic sadhana that one progressively attains recognition of the subtle realms of being, and ultimately, the inseparability of the individual, physical being from the absolute, divine Being.

It is this overt transformation of the focus, or geography,of yoga—from its classical (raja yoga) to tantric (kundalini/ laya yoga) context—that I would like to explore in this paper. Although, as has been argued, the goal of yoga (samadhi) may indeed remain the same, the techniques for achieving the goal vary among different schools. Due to the necessary brevity of this paper, I will focus my comparative analysis on the connections, commonalities and differences that obtain between the “classical” school of yoga developed by Patanjaliand the overtly praxis-oriented school of Hatha yoga, as presented in the Nath sampradaya text, the Hathayogapradipika (ca. 15th CE). Although there are important differences between these two schools, mostly in terms of the overt valuation and utilization of the human body as a means towards the ‘end’ of yoga, there are also some notable continuities and similarities. The Hathayogapradipika, for example, claims that the ultimate goal of its elaborate, physically technical path is not only the mastery of the body, but also the mind (rajayoga) and to this effect incorporates the last two stages of Patanjali’s yoga system. Mastery of the body (divyadeha) and the mind (cittavritti)are, in fact, conceived to be interdependent by the hathayoga school. The same might be said for Patanjali’s astangayoga, although he does not elaborate on the necessarily “embodied” steps of the path to the same extent as the hathayoga school.[9]

Before probing the means, goals and correspondences between these two schools in greater depth, it is useful to briefly examine the history, literature, and various classifications that have been accorded the many and various schools of yoga.

Categorizing Schools of Yoga

Systematizing, classifying, or categorizing the numerous streams of Indian “religious” thought and practice that has collectively come to be called Hinduism has been the work of many generations of scholars, practitioners, and lay people. Numerous books have been written to present the various systems of classification that have been developed over years of study and volumes more exist which attempt to problematize, critique, contribute to and move beyond what has come before.[10] This enquiry into the transition between classical, or Patanjala yoga and tantric, or hatha and kundalini yoga enters in to a muddled world of mixed adjectives, transferable names and vastly varied interpretations and systematizations of yoga.

If we accept Mircea Eliade’s definition of yoga, “any ascetic technique and any method of meditation”[11], then there are as many kinds of yoga as there are spiritual paths in India (e.g. karmayoga, bhaktiyoga, jnanayoga, Samkhya yoga, Buddhist yoga, Jaina yoga, Integral yoga, etc.). While all of these forms of “yoga” conform to Whicher’s formal definition of yoga,[12] he picks out eight “major” forms of yoga, including (1) classicalyogaor raja yoga (which is often used to refer to Patanjali’s astanga yoga), (2) jnanayoga, (3) hathayoga, (4) bhaktiyoga, (5) karmayoga, (6) mantrayoga, (7) layayoga and, (8) kundalini yoga. Whicher notes that laya and kundalini yoga are closely associated with hathayoga, and that raja yoga is often used in contrast with hathayoga.[13]According to Sanjukta Gupta, however, laya and kundalini yoga are essentially the same, “though some Tantrics are unaware of (their) identity”, and the techniques of hathayoga are “often despised by the Tantra”, so that, apparently, the hathayogin is not even considered a “true tantric”.[14]

In their focus on tantric traditions and their immediate associations, Sanjukta Gupta[15] and N.N. Bhattacharyya[16] simplify Whicher’s list by classifying yoga into only four categories: matrayoga, hathayoga, layayoga and rajayoga. Of this list, hathayoga occupies a rather ambiguous place. Despite the fact that both discuss hathayoga within a tantric context, they agree that it is not as “characteristically tantric” as layayoga, kundalini yoga and mantra yoga. Interestingly, raja yoga is described as the “highest form of yoga”by all of the above-named sources. Conflating all of these schools and configuring them in a hierarchy, Bhattacharyya writes:

“The highest form of yoga…is Raja-Yoga through which nirvikalpa-samadhi is attained. By means of mantra, Hatha and Laya-yoga to aspirant steps up to perfection in the form of Raja-yoga which is complete and final liberation”.[17]

Similarly, Tookaram Tatya writes that “Raja-yoga begins where Hatha-yoga ends”. In accord, he simplifies Whicher, Gupta and Bhattacharyya’s lists by classifying all forms of yoga into two broad divisions: Hatha yoga and Raja yoga.[18] He writes: “The Raja and the Hatha yogas are necessary counterparts of each other, the limbs as it were of the same body, wither of them cannon be successfully followed to the exclusion of the other…”[19] Although Tatya is likely writing as an adherent to the hathayoga path, it is noteworthy that this kind of conflation or fluid crossing of “disciplinary boundaries” is not uncommon in yoga texts, commentaries and academic expositions.

Although scholarly frameworks which organize these many different schools and sub-schools of yoga tend to be more selective (e.g. Gupta above), they often either acknowledge some kind of conceptual and/or practical hierarchy existing between them (e.g. Bhattacharrya above), or a more subtle connection existent between them through a not necessarily dependent or hierarchal relationship between action (karma) and knowledge (jnana). For example, Goldberg, drawing from the commentary of Swami Krpalvananda’s (1913-1981) on the Hathayogapradipika, suggests that although there is a fundamental difference between the disciplinary orientation and emphasis of the raja and hatha yoga schools,[20] at some stage of practice, these distinctions necessarily dissolve (along with the need for or creation of karma).

“… (W)e see a distinct difference between karmayoga and jnanayoga (or rajayoga) insofar as the initial procedures require physical action; yet owing to their prolonged practice they are abandoned naturally in the final stages of attainment”.[21]

The “end” of yoga, thus, ultimately involves recognition of the “crucial interdependence…and continuity between hathayoga and rajayoga“.[22] Clearly, it would be inappropriate for one grasping for an understanding of the various classifications of yoga to conflate all systems into one owing to the fact that there are a vast number of means to the ultimate goal, each with separate histories, metaphysics and procedures for its attainment. Samadhi itself is also conceptualized differently among and between schools. In fact, the differences may even be construed as beneficial in terms of practice, as each practitioner may be inclined towards or suited for one or another form. Nonetheless, if one applies the same bi-polar metaphysics that inspires both Patanjali’s rajayoga and tantric schools of yoga to the actual study of these various systems, there is some stage where words and apparently separate systematic and hierarchal ontologies necessarily dissolve or, by nature, become inadequate qualifiers of what is actually experienced. This is the uniqueness of yoga—as a means toward a goal and, paradoxically a goal in itself, it requires action to propel one towards the eventual achievement of absolute inaction of both the physical (or “gross”) and subtle mind and body.

It is to a discussion of these systems of action, and in particular raja and hatha yoga to which I now turn. Despite this supposed eventual consumption or de-evolution of matter and differentiation that attains from the practice of yoga, rendering all of the above-named schools inherently “empty” of being, there is still a notable transformation that occurred in the transition from classical to tantric systems of yoga. Tantric systems of yoga elaborate complex, mystical physiologies in which the microcosm of the body is identified with the macrocosm of the universe, which serve as maps for the practitioner’s journey inward. Hathayoga, which is often described as preeminently practical in nature, places its emphasis on the use of the human body, and more particularly the need for one to transform it into a divine body (divya deha), to catapult the individual toward realization of boundless, Absolute reality. The same degree of focus on the physicality of liberation is not present in Patanjali’s classical exposition on yoga. Although asanas and pranayama are included in his astanga yoga, the Sutras are predominantly concerned with the later stages of yoga. As such, while the body is present in classical yoga, it is not its primary focus, as could be said for tantric, and especially hathayogic, traditions.

Still, a great deal of authority is afforded to Patanjali’s yoga; if not for a detailed description of the actual “means”, then certainly for the language and philosophy it provides one with to understand its “end”. The Hathayogapradipika, for example,contends that the goal of hathayoga is rajayoga. [23] This is, however, somewhat paradoxical because Patanjali’s yoga is so often conceived by contemporary scholars as radically dualistic as a result of its affiliations with and adaptation of the language of Samkhya, one of the leading schools or classical philosophical systems of India. Georg Feuerstein, for example, contrasts the ideal of rajayoga, which he writes “is to recover one’s true identity as the transcendental Self standing eternally apart from the realms of Nature,” with the ideal of hathayoga, which he states “is to create an immortal body”.[24] There seems, however, to be something missing from this analysis (it may indeed be more dualistic than his claim about Patanjali’s yoga because he fixes the goal of rajayoga as liberation from nature, or material reality and the goal of hathayoga as the perfection of nature…). Clearly, as will be discussed below, the “ideal” of hathayoga is not only to create an “immortal body”. Although this is considered a defining characteristic of hathayoga, and even a necessary step along the way towards its “ideal”, it should not be confused with its ultimate goal, namely, samadhi (or rajayoga). Perhaps, as Ian Whicher argues, the same might be said about Patanjali’s yoga. Although the explicit techniques for the achievement of liberation are not explicit in the Sutras, this does not necessarily mean that rajayoga is disembodied, “excessively spiritual” or isolationist to the point of being a world-denying philosophy, as Feuerstein suggests above. Although the praxis, or bodily, aspect of yoga is elaborated more overtly and in tantric, and especially hatha, systems of yoga, the theory and philosophy provided by Patanjali’s Yoga Sutras does not necessarily deny their importance or even necessity.

Classical Yoga

The Yoga Sutra represents the attempt by the great grammarian to provide concise definitions, descriptions and explanations of the central concepts relating to yoga, thereby providing it with a complete and systematic grounding which led to its recognition, legitimization and establishment as one of the six darsanas within Brahmanical Hinduism. It has come to be the most authoritative source for the classical yoga school of Hinduism. Whicher writes: “Out of all of the various yogic schools in existence around the time of the composition of the Yoga Sutra, it was Patanjali’s that was to become recognized as the authoritative perspective (darsana) of the Brahmanic Yoga tradition”.[25]

Many scholars find the roots of Patanjali’s yoga in preceding Indian speculative traditions; and in particular in the radically dualistic metaphysics of Samkhya philosophy (another of the six darsanas). Agehananda Bharati, for example, discusses Samkhya as one of the root contributors to the both classical and tantric ontologies. [26] Samkhya explains the universe as consisting of only two principles: prakrti, inert nature, and purusa, the conscious principal or absolute self. The phenomenal universe of experience, change, activity and movement happens in and through prakrti; purusa, conversely, is the pure consciousness or witness and does not act.[27] Flood states that in Patanjali’s yoga, liberation or nirbijasamadhi, is not the realization of the self’s identity with the absolute but rather, “the realization of the self’s solitude and complete transcendence” and “detached” from its entanglement with prakrti. [28] The fact that Patanjali draws on the language and metaphysics of Samkhya has caused many scholars to classify his yoga system as dualist. There are, however, some important differences between Samkhya and Yoga, which Whichler is careful to point out:

“In spite of the similarity between these schools in the approach to the basic structure of reality, they in fact present different systems of thought, holding divergent views on important areas of doctrinal structure such as theology, ontology, psychology, and ethics, as well as differences pertaining to terminology”.[29]

Although a full comparative analysis of Samkhya philosophy is beyond the scope of this paper, suffice is to say that both the samkhyan and rajayoga philosophies for attaining freedom (kaivalya, moksha), are intended to guide the practitioner to the realization of purusa and are thus ultimately derived for soteriological purposes. In order to translate the final realization of yoga into practical, experiential terms, Patanjali translaterd a macrocosmic perpective into subjective, microcosmic terms. Absolute spiritual integration is the ultimate goal of yoga and experience seems to be at the heart of Patanjali’s discourse.

Perhaps the most important difference that exists between these two schools is related to their methodologies. Their ‘means’ for arriving at the ‘end’ or yoga are significantly different. Samkhya relies primarily on discernment between purusa and prakrti, “stressing a theoretical/intellectual analysis” to bring one to emancipation, understood as “isolation” (kaivalya), whereas yoga is “a practical spiritual discipline for mastering the modifications of the mind, and abiding as the changeless identity of Self (purusa)”.[30] Surendranath Dasgupta also observes this difference between the Samkhya and Yoga darsanas. He posits that although the schools are fundamentally the same in their metaphysical positions, they hold quite different views on many points of philosophical, ethical and practical interest.[31]

It is noteworthy that the emphasis on practice as a factor that distinguishes classical yoga from Samkhya is present in both of Whicher and Dasgupta’s discussions. Put candidly, Whicher states,

“Samkhya’s overt conceptual means of discrimination (vijnana) is not sufficient enough for the aspiring yogin…Without praxis and its experiential and perceptual dimension, philosophy would have no meaning in Yoga… In yoga, immortality…cannot be demonstrated through inference, analysis and reasoning”.[32]

The Yoga Sutra clearly evidences the central importance that Patanjali gives to experience.

The “eight-limbed” (astanga) path elaborated in the Yoga Sutra can be read as a kind of psychocosmological map, which leads the seeker through progressive stages of disciplined physical and mental training in order to slowly unravel layers of ignorance and delusion which serve to bind the true spirit (purusa) within to the phenomenal world (prakrti). The Yoga Sutra proposes that through dedication to the path of yoga, one gradually becomes aware of the subtle levels of not only the material world but, importantly, how it is reflected inwardly. Patanjali tells us in his opening aphorisms, however, that the very goal of yoga, the “cessation of the turnings of thought” (1:2-4) is only possible through “practice and dispassion” (1:12). One must actively engage in the rigorous effort to still the cognitive functions of the mind (cittavritti). Although the greatest proportion of the Sutras (and commentary on them)is concerned with the later, essentially “inner” stages of meditation(dharana, dhyana, samadhi), the first five steps (yama, niyama, asana, pranayama, pratyahara), which consist of preliminary, “external” exercises, are integral to his rajayoga in that they prepare the practitioner for the more advanced “internal” stages. In her translation of the Yoga Sutras, Barbara Stoler Miller writes that, “For Patanjali, the interior dimensions of yoga are impossible to attain unless one first pays attention to the body”.[33]

Through the meditative practices and contemplative thought experiments Patanjali prescribes,an intimate “transformative” realization is ultimately achieved. Through the initial stages of his yoga, one must pass beyond the bounds of material nature and learn to watch, instead of engage, in the games of the mind and intellect. It is a progressive, unlearning process:

“When the turnings of thought stop, a contemplative poise occurs, in which thought, like a polished crystal, is colored by what is nearby–whether perceiver, process of perception, or object of perception” (1:41).

Through “contemplative poise” one becomes aware through intuitive means or by the intellect that prakrti and purusa are distinct. This “seed-bearing contemplation” (sabija-samadhi) leaves traces and still involves cognitive processes but important wisdom is gained by it (1:41-46):

“A subliminal impression generated by wisdom stops the formation of other impressions. When the turnings of thought cease completely, even wisdom ceases, and contemplation bears no seeds” (1:50-51).

The “tranquility” that follows the “intuitive cognition” of seed-bearing contemplation (1:47) sets the ground for an even deeper state. The seed of wisdom gained by sabija-samadhi stops the formation of new thought or impressions. Miller writes that thought, recorded memory and even intuition “have no relevance to the realization of the state of pure contemplation” (nirbija-samadhi)–even the wisdom gained in sabija-samadhi dissolves.[34] Rational knowledge, made of prakrti, is necessary to proceed on the path, but in a kind of backwards cycle of de-evolution. One strips prakrti of its external components until it no longer exists—all that is left is purusa which itself dissolves.

Patanjali is most consistentlycelebrated for these expositions on the training of the mind. The very foundation of Patanjali’s yoga practice, writes Whicher, is “mastery of the mind…through the process of nirodha” (cessation).[35] Although this involves a “wide range of methods” (physical, moral, psychological, and spiritual), Patanjali’s yoga is most commended or remembered for its “serious enquiry into the structures and contents of the mind along with an analysis of how the mind—including the empirically rooted sense of self—differs from purusa“.[36] Despite the avowed importance Patanjali places in the preliminary moral and physical aspects of his yoga to prepare one for the later stages of contemplation, meditation and pure concentration,he only devotes ten brief lines to description of asana, pranayama, and pratyahara. Although commentary on these three stages has speculated on which asanas and pranayamas Patanjali was likely alluding to (e.g. Gupta, who writes that “simple sitting-postures are recommended” like lotus, svastika, vajra, bhadra, vira[37]), it is the hathayogins that eventually expand this aspect of yoga into a vast system of physically and spiritually efficacious postures, and it is to this system that we turn now.

Hathayoga

“While Patanjali’s yoga is primarily concerned with developing mental concentration in order to experience samadhi, hathayoga, or the ‘yoga of force’, develops a system of elaborate and difficult postures (asana) accompanies by breathing techniques (pranayama)”.[38]

Hathayoga occupies a rather ambiguous, and somewhat marginalized position in the vast domain of Indian soteriological systems. As discussed above, its name appears in books, chapters and articles about Tantra, and yet it is most commonly associated with or considered an extension of the classical yoga system of Patanjali and/or Samkha philosophy.[39] Where rajayoga is deemed the “highest” path of yoga[40], hathayoga is described as “inferior”, or “despised by the Tantra”.[41] This occurs in some sources, however, while others attempt to draw parallels with and “fit” hathayoga into the tantric fold.[42] It becomes clear from a careful reading on one of its principle texts, the 15th century Hathayogapradipika, that it in fact corresponds and draws from many, if not all, of these sources, and yet develops them in a unique, and perhaps often misunderstood, way.

As Flood’s quote above implies, hathayoga presents itself as an effort to bring to center “the yoga of force” or “action” (kriyayoga). What he neglectes to mention, however, accurate though it might be, is the fact that hathayoga names rajayoga as its goal. It differs from Patanjali’s yoga, however, primarily because it focuses so intently on the means of achieving the later, “interior” stages of yoga. The aim of hathayoga has been described variously by different authors as a system of yoga aiming to “master” [43] or “control” [44] the body, “overcome normal physiological limits” [45], or to “create an immortal body”[46]. Ellen Goldberg warns, however, that we must “confuse the means with the end”.[47] Perfection, according to Eliade, is always the goal, and, “it is neither athletic, nor hygienic perfection”.[48] The goal of hathayoga, according to one of its primary source texts, the Hathayogapradipika (15th century), is rajayoga (4:103).[49] Although this text goes to great lengths to provide meticulous descriptions of the “means”, little is spared to remind the student of hathayoga that they are only useful insofar as they facilitate knowledge, and ultimately, its dissolution (laya) in the higher stages of rajayoga (4:103).

The body, however, attains unparalleled importance as a “means” in hathayoga. All of the preliminary stages work to master the body, in order to transmute it into a divine body (divyadeha). There is no confusing the goal with the means in the Hathayogapradipika. Eliade writes:

“Philosophical justification has a very small place in these brief treatises, which are entirely devoted to technical formulas. The states of consciousness corresponding to the various exercises are mentioned only rarely and in a rudimentary way. It is the physics and physiology of meditation that are the chief concern of these writers”.[50]

The yoga taught in the Hathayogaprdipika pays close attention to describing the specific practices (sadhana) that will lead to experience of absolute reality, or transcendence. Through practice of the its six- fold purificatory program (satkarma), followed by (and in this order) asana, mudra, pranayama, pratyahara, dhyana, and liberation (samadhi), the final stage, is gradually and systematically induced. The stages of hathayoga are arranged hierarchically because mastery of one prepares one and leads one on to next. The Satkarma prepares the body and keeps it healthy. Asana (such as svastikasana, virasana, matsyasana, pascimotattanasana etc.) and mudra are important aids for regulating vital breath (pranayama). By controlling the breath, the practitioner stops the passage of the breaths through the nadis (“veins” of the subtle body that connect the mind and the senses), thereby stopping the activities of the senses and severing the connection to the mind and the external stimuli which prevent concentration (dhyana) on the essence of the individual self. Pranayama, thus, merges with pratyahara which further melds into the final two stages of hathayoga (rajayoga). Ellen Goldberg writes: “In the same manner that hathayoga leads to rajayoga, asana (as well as other ritual technology such as pranayama, mudra, nada, etc.) leads to advanced stages of meditation (dhyana, samadhi)”.[51]

Although hathayoga clearly takes on a language and practical soteriology of its own, which deserves to be examined on its own merit, it may be (and indeed has been) effectively argued that its goal (moksa) is not different from other forms of yoga.[52] Tatya, in the introduction to a (relatively) recent translation of the Hathayogapradipika writes:

“The Hatha- and Raja-yoga’s far from being antagonistic towards each other, are, on the contrary, interdependent, and the pursuit of the Raja-yoga cannot be successfully accomplished without the cooperation of the sister Hatha-yoga”.[53]

According to Sanjukta Gupta, the philosophical speculations about the nature of prakrti and purusa, and the psycho-physical techniques that were systematized in Patanjali’s yoga (to eliminate one’s “false” identification with prakrti) ultimatelyculminated in hathayoga.[54] Clearly, however, tantric theory and practice also influenced hathayoga. There are many allusions made to the “subtle body” metaphysics of kundalini, and layayoga in the Hathayogapradipika. The very fact that hathayoga places so much emphasis on the body may be justification enough to make this parallel, and is likely the reason it always manages to find its way into discussions of tantric sadhana.[55]

Tantric theory and practice (sadhana) revolve, in general, around the basic metaphysical tenet that the absolute reality contains in itself all polarities and all dualities. All that exists and all that is created and destroyed represents the shattering of ultimate unity, the coming apart of the two principles (represented variously as macrocosm and microcosm, Siva & Sakti, samsara and nirvana, purusa and prakrti, ha- & tha- etc.).[56] Despite the different philosophical leanings, symbolism and practical soteriologies, in all cases, the absolute reality is conceived of possessing two attributes or aspects, which stand in polar opposition to one another. They are “conceived as the negative and the positive, the static and dynamic, rest (nivrtti) and activity (pravritti)–the principle of pure consciousness and the principle of activity;–one represents subjectivity and the other objectivity; and, again, the one is conceived as the enjoyer and the other as the enjoyed”.[57] The experience of duality and thus bondage, suffering and illusion is a consequence of the experience of a state of duality. The purpose of tantric yoga, thus, is to bring the two polar principles back together; first within the disciple’s own body and then to be realized in all experience[58].

Volumes of complicated theory and symbolism codify this idea in a countless variety of ways. It is constantly stressed, however, that any of the concepts we may try to attribute to the immutable paradox of reality, which is at once one and many, necessarily fall short of the truth. The universal and absolute consciousness with which the yogin must become identified can not be known through speculation, which is inherently dualistic in character. Thus, the esoteric practices described in the Tantras, eighty per cent of which are concerned with ritual,[59] concern themselves with the ultimate union of these dual aspects of totality.

This concern with a practical soteriology clearly inspires hathayoga the goal of which is the union (yoga) of the two, bi-polar principles: ha=sun + tha=moon. As the tantras never tired of reiterating, nothing can be achieved without practice. The hathayoga texts, Ellen Goldberg writes, “basically adopts a philosophical framework form which to expound its programmatic praxis-oriented ritual procedures”.[60] It is essentially a “bottom-up” procedure, which aims to bring about a return of being (microcosm) into essence (macrocosm). The mediation between these two states of being occurs within the “gross”, physical body and the “subtle”, essential body (mesocosm). Hathayoga, in this sense, serves as a technique for the reabsorption or implosion of the human microcosm into the divine source. This process of de-evolution, or merging of effect into cause, is symbolized as kundalini’s journey through and piercing of the chakras. It is in these very subtle realms into which alchemy, the subject of David Gordon White’s book, The Alchemical Body, enters. He writes:

“When the kundalini rises from the muladhara cakra to the svadhisthana, the element earth becomes reabsorbed into and encompassed by the element water. Likewise, water is reabsorbed into fire in the third cakra, the manipura; fire into air in the anahata; and air into ether in the visuddhi cakra. As in Samkhya, hathayoga, and other hierarchical systems, so too in alchemy: that which is higher encompasses, absorbs, that which is lower”.[61]

These experiences, however, only occur in the later, culminating stages of hathayoga. Preceding this subtle gnosis is, in the grave words of Aurobindo, “a lengthly, laborious, and tedious procedure”![62] One needs to be reminded through this process, however, that both tantric and hathayoga treatises declare the attainment of a “divine body” as a necessary preliminary “step” towards enlightenment. In the hathayogic tradition, this groundwork comprises many, interpenetrating advances along a hierarchical path. Gradual shifts in consciousness bring one progressively closer to its final goal, rajayoga.

Concluding Remarks

Although there has been a great deal of scholarly research directed at the many and various systems of yoga that have developed in India over a period of several millennia, there is clearly a tendency to view it in terms of its philosophical and doctrinal characteristics rather than in its other aspect—as a kind of “spiritual technology”.[63] Yoga, as developed in the Hathayogapradipika for example, directs one’s attention to the various practical means prescribed by the various disciplines of yoga to propel the practitioner towards his or her goal. It would seem that if the ultimate “goal” of yoga is indeed “union” of the individual self (jivatman) with the supreme self (paramatman), the means to this goal are just as important and worthy of examination as the goal itself.

Having examined the classical yoga expounded in Patanjali’s classic, the Yoga Sutras, and the Hathayogapradipika of Svatmarama, and its associations with tantric theory and practice, it becomes clear that they share some important similarities and differences. Although the Yoga Sutra does probe some of the same practices that arise in the Hathayogapradipika, it remains a fundamentally rajayoga text. It does not locate the body or practice centrally, nor does is expound upon the actual physical practices in nearly as much detail as this kriyayoga tradition. Hathayoga, in its turn, places central importance on the utilization of prescribed physical techniques, combined with subtle physiology, to progress towards Ultimate “union”. Despite their differences in character, however, they ultimately lead the practitioner to the same goal, namely the cessation of the cognitive functions or fluctuations of the mind. The psychophysical effects of hathayoga prepare the ground for the emergence of rajayoga. The transition from classical to tantric forms and theories of yoga, as such,involved the development of integrative practices between body and mind (in this order).

This is not to say, however that Patanjali’s classical exposition on Yoga, was entirely doctrinally or philosophically centered. Whicher notes that it is reasonable to assume that Patanjali “was an active preceptor or guru“, and a great authority on yoga. He notes that he was also writing at a time “of intense debate and ongoing philosophical speculation in India”[64]. From these conjectures, it is quite possible that Patanjali did not place the same amount of effort into developing the same kind of detailed exegesis on practice as the hathayoga texts because: (1) He may have made assumptions about the background and preparedness of the audience for whom he was writing (perhaps a community of disciples, already devoted to the study and practice of yoga); and/or (2) In his effort to supply yoga with a reasonably inclusive and homogenous framework so that it might at par with the many rival traditions, he could not write more than could be remembered (the Yoga Sutras belong to the smrti literature within Hinduism). The former explanation may be more plausible, especially as yoga is characterized not only by its practical nature, but also its initiatory structure. It is conceivable that, because he provides at least a basic framework for praxis, Patanjali only said as much as he needed to in order to impart the essential essence of his yoga.

Out of this classical system, or perhaps in response to it, there emerged new monistic currents of thought with Vedanta speculation and literature, and later the Tantras. Hathayoga, one of the many schools that unfolded during this time period, makes the goal of yoga (rajayoga) dependent on and consistent with its means, which are more overtly elaborated than in Patanjali’s discourse on yoga. Neither school, however, denies the importance of practice. The means are just as important as the end, and neither should be viewed in isolation if a ‘holistic’ understanding of the many various and complex systems of yoga is to be achieved.

Works Cited

Basu, M., 1986. Fundamentals of the Philosophy of the Tantras. Calcutta: Mira Basu Publishers

Bharati, Agehananda, 1975. The Tantric Tradition. Samuel Weiser, Inc., N.Y.

Bhattacharyya, N.N., 1999. History of the Tantric Religion: As Historical, Ritualistic and Philosophical Study. New Delhi: Manohar

Das Gupta, Shashibhusan, 1976. Obscure Religious Cults. Saraswati Printing Press, Delhi

Dasgupta, Surendranath, 1930. Yoga Philosophy in Relation to Other Systems of Indian Thought. Calcutta: Calcutta University Press

Eliade, Mircea, 1973. Yoga, Immortality and Freedom. 2nd Ed. Trans. Willard R. Trask. Princeton, NJ: Bollingen; 4

Feuerstein, Georg, 1979. The Yoga Sutra of Patanjali: As Exercise in the Methodology of Textual Analysis. New Delhi: Arnold-Heinemann

Feuerstein, Georg, 1989. Yoga: The Technology of Ecstasy. Los Angelos, CA: J.P. Tarcher; 38

Flood, Gavin, 1998. An Introduction to Hinduism. New Delhi: Cambridge University Press; 97-98

Fuerstein, Georg, 1998. Tantra: The Path to Ecstasy. Shambhala, Boston

Goldberg, Ellen, 2001. “The Hathayogapradipika of Svatmarama and the Rahasyabodhini of Krpvalananda”. In: Journal of Indian Philosophy and Religion. Vol.6 (Oct.)

Gupta, Sanjukta, 1979. “Modes of Worship and Meditation”. In: S. Gupta, D.J. Hoens, T. Goudriaan. Hindu Tantrism. Leiden, Koln: E.J. Brill

Miller, B.S., 1995, (trans); Yoga: Discipline of Freedom. Los Angelos, CA: University of California Press

Tatya, Tookaram, 1972. “Introduction”, In: The Hathayogapradipika of Svatmarama. Adyar, Madras: Vasanta Press

Whicher, Ian, 1998. The Integrity of the Yoga Darshana: A Reconsideration of Classical Yoga. New York: SUNY Press

White, David Gordon, 1996. The Alchemical Body: Siddha Traditions in Medieval India. Chicago: University of Chicago Press

Footnotes

[1] David Gordon White, 1996. The Alchemical Body: Siddha Traditions in Medieval India. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 18. NOTE: Similar identification also made in the Hathayogapradipika (4.50).

[2] ibid., 18

[3] Georg Feuerstein, 1989. Yoga: The Technology of Ecstasy. Los Angelos, CA: J.P. Tarcher; 38

[4] Ian Whicher, 1998. The Integrity of the Yoga Darshana: A Reconsideration of Classical Yoga. New York: SUNY Press; 38

[5] See D.G. White, 1996; I. Whicher, 1998; G. Feuerstein, 1989; for survey of history, literature and branches of yoga.

[6] Ian Whicher, 1998; 38-39

[7] Ian Whicher (1998) challenges interpretations that present Patanjali’s yoga as dualistic, seeing it rather as an “integral” path which does not advocate abandonment of the world (prakrti), but rather “supports as stance that enables one to live more fully in the world without being enslaved by worldly identification”. This is an interesting enquiry, but lies beyond the scope of this paper.

[8] Although hathayoga is often discussed in relation to or as a tantric variant of yoga, it is unclear if it is “officially” part of the Tantric milieu. In this paper, I will discuss it as if it is.

[9] See concluding remarks in this paper for an explanation of some of the very good reasons why this may be the case.

[10] See T. Goudriaan, 1979. “Introduction, History and Philosophy”. In: S. Gupta, D.J.Hoens, T. Goudriaan. Hindu Tantrism. Leiden, Koln: E.J. Brill; 3-5.

[11] Mircea Eliade, 1973. Yoga, Immortality and Freedom. 2nd Ed. Trans. Willard R. Trask. Princeton, NJ: Bollingen; 4

[12] “South Indian paths of spiritual emancipation, or self transcendence, that bring about a transmutation of consciousness culminating in liberation from the confines of egoic identity or worldly existence”. In: Whicher, 1998; 6

[13] I. Whicher, 1998; 6

[14] Sanjukta Gupta, 1979. “Modes of Worship and Meditation”. In: S. Gupta, D.J. Hoens, T. Goudriaan. Hindu Tantrism. Leiden, Koln: E.J. Brill; 164-165

[15] ibid.; 164

[16] N.N. Bhattacharyya, 1999. History of the Tantric Religion: As Historical, Ritualistic and Philosophical Study. New Delhi: Manohar; 308

[17] ibid, 1999; 309

[18] Tookaram Tatya, 1972. “Introduction”, In: The Hathayogapradipika of Svatmarama. Adyar, Madras: Vasanta Press; ix

[19] ibid, 1972; xii-xiii

[20] Ellen Goldberg, 2001. “The Hathayogapradipika of Svatmarama and the Rahasyabodhini of Krpvalananda”. In: Journal of Indian Philosophy and Religion. Vol.6 (Oct.); 22

[21] ibid, 23

[22] ibid; 24

[23] Although “rajayoga” does not always necessarily refer to Patanjali’s yoga (Gupta, 1979, describes in what other contexts it is used), I chose to use Gupta’s definition; “that which leads to immediate samadhi“, or what Patanjala yoga refers to as “undifferentiated merger” (asamprajnata samadhi).

[24] G. Feuerstein, 1989; 38, italics mine

[25] I. Whicher, 1998; 42

[26] Agehananda Bharati, 1975. The Tantric Tradition. Samuel Weiser, Inc., N.Y.; 204-208

[27] However, and interestingly, they are conceptually interdependent in so far as prakrti cannot act if purusa is not present. See Bharati, 1975;205

[28] Gavin Flood, 1998. An Introduction to Hinduism. New Delhi: Cambridge University Press; 97-98

[29] I. Whicher, 1998; 53

[30] ibid; 53, italics mine

[31] Surendranath Dasgupta, 1930. Yoga Philosophy in Relation to Other Systems of Indian Thought. Calcutta: Calcutta University Press; 2

[32] I. Whicher, 1998; 53

[33] B.S. Miller, 1995, (trans.); Yoga: Discipline of Freedom. Los Angelos, CA: University of California Press

[34] B.S. Miller, 1995; 43

[35] I. Whicher, 1998; 152

[36] ibid; 152

[37] S. Gupta, 1979; 167

[38] G. Flood, 1998; 98

[39] T. Tatya writes that rajayoga and hathayoga are terms that are “synonymous” with the Samkhya and Yoga darsanas (xiv).

[40] N.N. Bhattacharyya, 1999; 309

[41] S. Gupta, 1979; 164-165

[42] For example, Ian Whicher (1998; 6) writes that laya and kundalini yoga are “closely associated with hathayoga.” 1998; 6

[43] M. Eliade, 1973; 228

[44] M. Basu, 1986. Fundamentals of the Philosophy of the Tantras. Calcutta: Mira Basu Publishers; 624

[45] S. Gupta, 1979; 180

[46] G. Feuerstein, 1989; 38, italics mine

[47] E. Goldberg, 2001; 13

[48] M. Eliade, 1973; 228

[49] Svatmarama Svamin, 1972. Hathayogapradipika. Adyar, Madras: Adyar Library and Research Center

[50] M. Eliade, 1973; 230

[51] E. Goldberg, 2001; 9

[52] For example, see E. Goldberg, 2001; 6-7. Goldberg suggests that Patanjali’s astanga system of yoga and the six stages of hathayoga presented in the Hathayogapradipika can be “roughly” paralleled. She also correlates the “rajayoga” described in the HYP with the last three stages (antarangas) of Patanjali’s system (Although Patanjali is never mentioned in the HYP).

[53] T. Tatya, 1972; xvi

[54] S. Gupta, 1979; 166

[55] See, for example, M. Eliade, 1973; 200-273, and S. Gupta, D.J. Hoens, and T. Goudriaan, 1979; 163-183

[56] Shashibhusan Das Gupta, 1976. Obscure Religious Cults. Saraswati Printing Press, Delhi; xxxvi

[57] ibid; xxxiv

[58] ibid; xxxv

[59] Fuerstein, Georg, 1998. Tantra: The Path to Ecstasy. Shambhala, Boston; 124

[60] E. Goldberg, 2001; 21

[61] D. G. White, 1996; 208. See also S. Gupta, 1979; 176-177

[62] M. Basu, 1986; 624

[63] E. Goldberg. “The Hathayogapradipika of Svatmarama and the Rahasyabodhini of Krpvalananda”. Queen’s University, Kingston, ON: Unpublished; 1

[64] I. Whicher, 1998; 43

Related

• The “Pure Consciousness Experience”

During the 2004 race for the United States presidency, there were many issues that divided the nation along liberal and conservative lines. One of the great ironies that still divides the nation is the issue of the legal recognition of marriages involving same gender couples. In this country, marriage is considered a legally, morally, and spiritually binding contract between two people who promise faithful love and support to one another and consists of vows often spoken in front of familial and religious witnesses. One would reason, then, that legal recognition of such a union would extend to any two persons of legal age, since American law and religious canon so often operate hand-in-hand in our democratic system of government. Legally-recognized unions also carry with them certain rights and privileges, whichwould seem to be all the more reason for the government to extend legal recognition to all US marriages; however, such is not the case.

Opponents of the legal recognition of same-gender marriage often cite legislative and historical reasons for their positions. Yet it is within the backgrounds of their same resources that one can find cause to ensure that gay couples receive the legal protections, rights, and privileges as do our hetero-gendered counterparts.

Legislative Context

Article IV, Sections 1 and 2, of the United States Constitution is very clear with regard to the legal responsibilities shared between and among all the states in the Union. Known as “Full Faith and Credit”, the sections of this Article state that “[full] faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state” and that “[the] citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges… of citizens in the several states”¹. Several questions arise to test the hypothesis that marriages between gay persons are legislatively the same as marriages between non-gay persons.

1. Can marriages between gay persons be considered public acts? Yes, they can, in the same ways that marriages between non-gay persons are considered public acts. Marriages between gay persons, which are often referred to as Holy Unions, involve in vows spoken before clergy, friends, and families, in ceremonies as similar and diverse as marriages between non-gay persons. Holy Unions also include the exchanging of rings, charges to the couple as well as to their witnesses, celebrations of Holy Communion, and many other aspects of the marriage rite. In fact, the celebration of the union between two gay persons constitutes a traditional marriage ceremony, in every way but one: the genders of the persons taking the vows.
2. Are marriages between gay persons matters of public record? Whenever possible, yes they are. In states where affianced gay couples are allowed to apply for marriage certificates and submit other paperwork to secure legal standing for their relationships, they do so. When they meet opposition or resistance to their registries, they often attempt to fight that discrimination through legal means. These actions, as well as their ramifications, become public record through court filings, news coverage, and other forms of public record keeping.
3. Do any aspects of marriage between gay persons become judicial proceedings? Yes, they do. Fighting marriage discrimination through court filings is just one way this occurs. When one partner takes the last name of the other, and makes this change through the court system, this process is a legal proceeding. The adoption of children within the union is a legal proceeding, as are any adoptions occurring during the course of the relationship. Whatever legal actions gay couples take to establish the existence and validity of their relationships and their families are judicial proceedings.

In the test of legality, marriages involving gay couples pass the legislative test. It would, therefore, show an undeniably high level of bigotry for opponents of gay marriage to enact laws that so obviously counter the spirit of equality expressed in the “Full Faith and Credit” Article contained in the US Constitution.

Historical Context

The United States has a long history of oppression, segregation, and discriminatory practices—all legal during various times in our struggle to become, and remain, a united collection of states and territories. In fact, much the United States (particularly, the South) was built through the blood, sweat, and laborious tears of a people who legally “belonged” to others who brought them here by force. Those who have been charged with running our government began that legacy by enforcing “squatters’ rights”, also known as adverse possession. The “squatters”, in this case, came to this country and—through brutal and bloody means—claimed these lands for their own, uprooting and displacing thousands of native peoples who had lived here for generations before them. Walking through the doorway of this new millennium, it is really no wonder that there are still those who hang on to rights, protections, and privileges as if no one else deserves the same considerations.

Fifty years ago, the push for civil rights brought the realities and ramifications of institutionalized and legalized discrimination into the forefront of the American consciousness. African Americans—Americans whose ancestors were forcibly removed from their homelands, brought to this strange place, and worked until death without pay—stood up to say that “separate but equal” is never equal and never works. Fast forward to 2005, and we find that the same belief holds true for gay couples seeking marriage equality.

The Rainbow Alliance cites over sixty areas that are unequal in their applications to gay and non-gay couples, among them:

1. Shared Taxes. Married non-gay couples get to average their salaries to reach a lower bracket which benefits married couples with one high-wage worker and one low-wage worker (typical of a family where perhaps the mother works “mom’s hours” to supplement the budget while the kids are young.) Gay couples in a comparable situation are taxed at a higher rate.
2. Next-of-kin privileges. If one partner gets sick or dies, the other can be shut out of the process by the patient’s family, particularly dangerous in families who do not accept the patient’s partner or family situation. Legal recognition of marriages between gay persons would place the control of these gut wrenching situations into the control of the spouse and not the patient’s family-of-birth, just as it is in marriages between non-gay persons.
3. Bereavement leave. Many employers only grant leave to workers who lose close relatives. Significant Others (SOs) are not factored into the equation, so to speak, unlike spouses in legally recognized marriages.
4. Pensions and health insurance. Few employers grant benefits to the spouses of their gay employees. Even in those cases where benefits are granted, these benefits are taxed; spousal benefits for non-gay beneficiaries are not taxed.
5. Immigration. Marriage between immigrants and non-gay Americans automatically confers US citizenship to immigrating spouses. Gay couples have to separate when the immigrating spouse’s visa expires.
6. Social Security. Only the surviving spouses in non-gay marriages receive survivor benefits.
7. Inheritance. Gay spouses pay estate taxes, non-gay spouses are exempt. In addition, only non-gay widows and widowers have legal standing to challenge the wills of their late spouses.²

These examples serve to illustrate, with depth and clarity, the breadth of subjugation practices in the United States with legislative and historical precedence and prescience. These practices are systematic, ingrained in our psyches for the past 500 years. It is how we have been operating; it is still the way we operate today. Gay couples in the United States face the same struggle for marriage equality that Native American couples, American couples of African Descent, and American Black/White couples faced over the course of uniting these states—making the theory of “special rights”³ a moot point. Legal marriage protection, with the bestowal of legal marital responsibilities and legal marital privileges, is not a special right. It is a cultural trinity that represents a sacred rite of passage, one that should available to every law abiding (or what passes for such), tax paying, and contributing citizen of the United States and her possessions. It was once withheld from native couples, from black couples, and from black-and-white couples, during the course of our history together, and laws are being enacted and re-interpreted in order to withhold it from non-gay couples. But if we all pay the same taxes and abide by the same laws, those laws need to include and protect all of us and confer upon us the same rights, privileges, and responsibilities, regardless of the genders of our spouses.

Whether approaching the issue of gay marriage from a legislative standpoint or from a historical one, it is clear that the present course of events will lead to a definite change in the fabric of how one defines what it means to be an American. Our cultural history indicates that gay couples are just another segment of society whose once-ignored face is gaining clarity and shape on the American landscape. How will future generations see us? Today’s high-school and college-age kids are tomorrow’s government and cultural leaders—and many of them have gay parents, uncles and aunts, and grandparents. And many of them are gay, as well. It is my hope that the laws we enact now will protect them and endow all of them with the same rights and privileges, regardless of the genders of their spouses.

Cited

1 US House of Representatives – Text of the U.S. Constitution.

2 The Rainbow Alliance – Religious Definition of Marriage.

3 Note: ‘Special rights’ is a political term used primarily by conservatives in the United States to refer to laws that enumerate rights related to sexual orientation. Gay rights advocates prefer to describe these laws as ending discrimination, and thus conferring equal rights.” Wikipedia – Special rights.

Related

• Should gay marriage be recognized?
• The Emergence of Advertising in America 1850-1920
• A Comparison of Gorky and Machtet’s Writings on America
• Gender Roles in Edward Albee’s Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?

Some Muslims who took over the Holy Lands made Christians and people of the Jewish faith second class citizens by placing economic and religious discriminations upon them. After the destruction of the Holy Sepulcher, Pope Urban II called Christians to retake the Holy Land of Jerusalem. He wanted to liberate the Christians left in the hands of the Muslims. Muslims, at the time, were threatening to conquer the Byzantine Empire for the cause of Allah (Closson, Don.). Both parties of the crusades were both merciful and merciless during the 400 years of battles. History books like to emphasize the atrocities that Christians committed towards Jewish and Muslim peoples and emphasize the tolerance of the Muslim people towards the ahl al-kitab, or people of the book.(Paine) It is true that Christians slaughtered people during the siege of Jerusalem, but in truth, both Muslims and Christians committed horrific atrocities on mankind during the crusades.

In 1099, Christianity took back the Holy City of Jerusalem. This spawned a feeling of disgust throughout Islam towards the west. One man would reclaim Jerusalem as a part of Islam in 1187, his name was Saladin. As a child, Saladin was a scholar who studied the Koran but had a love of poetry. Throughout his life, he continued his studies always believing that there was more to learn. He grew up in the town of Baalbek where his father, Ayyub, was governor.(Maalouf)

Saladin came to power through Nur ed-din, a popular general from Damascus, part of the Fatimid clan. During the second crusade, Nur ed-din tightened his grip on the area surrounding the Christians. Nur ed-din, the successor of Zangi, was one of the first adversaries of the crusaders who had any skill or true military genius. Nur ed-din’s military genius lay in that he never persecuted anyone who was simply suspicious, he never kept booty for himself but donated it to “pious foundations,” and strived to always make the brotherhood of Islam a reality.(Saunders)

In the year 1152, Saladin joined the military under his uncle Shirkuh. Shirkuh was under the command of Nur ed-din. Saladin learned military strategy from the two men and quickly moved up rank. In 1154 Nur ed-din with the help of Shirkuh and Saladin was able to take Damascus which created a unified Muslim state in Syria.(Lewis) At 18, Saladin became a deputy in Damascus but resigned shortly after his appointment.(Setton)

In 1168, the sultan of Syria sent his Kurdish commander, Shirkuh, to Egypt to help fight the next wave of crusaders. Shirkuh brought his nephew with him, Saladin. While there, Saladin captured a wazir, Shawar. Shawar had called in the Franks to help him and because of this was executed at Saladin’s request. Saladin and Shirkuh ended Shawar rule of Egypt thus allowing Shirkuh the ability to weasel his way into the kingship due to his loyalty to Nur ed-din (Paine, 80). Saladin’s uncle died shortly after taking control leaving Saladin as a natural successor.

Now that Nur ed-din had Egypt in his realm of control, he knew that he would have to make a move against the Franks being as they had been aligned with Shawar. But at the same time, Nur ed-din had become wary of Saladin and his intentions. Saladin did not wish to fight against the Franks. What saved Saladin from a confrontation with Nur ed-din and the Franks was Nur ed-dins sudden death in 1174 (Paine 81.) What Nur ed-din had accomplished was making the Arab world a contendable force against the Franks, but it was Saladin who would eventually reap the benefits (Maalouf 145).

Saladin faced a great many challenges when he became Sultan of Egypt. On of his greatest challenges was making Egypt part of the Abbasid allegiance being as it was part of the Fatimid dynasty. He had also inherited a mismatched army comprised of 30,000 Sudanese infantry and several regiments of white cavalry which he was unsure of how to deal with. Saladin believed that he should and could build an army of his own, but with this notion come rebellion from Egyptian officers. Those who rebelled were eventually put down by Saladin’s brothers and driven into Upper Egypt.

In April of 1175, Saladin was determined to fight a true jihad, holy war, against the crusaders.(Saladin) In order to achieve this he knew he had to follow strict Muslim rule. A jihad was, “a government which sought to serve the cause of God in battle must not only be a lawful government, duly authorized by the supreme representative of the divine law, but must serve God with equal zeal in it’s administration and its treatment of its subjects.”(Setton 569). Saladin wanted to show his military that all wealth should go to the holy war and not for his personal gain. The Christian response to this jihad was a crusade in order to “recover by war what had been lost by war-to free the holy places of Christendom and open them once again, without impediment, to Christian pilgrimage.”(Lewis)

After Nur ed-dins death, Saladin began to tighten his control on the Franks by utilizing the natural resources of Egypt. There were many battles between Saladin’s forces and the Christians. Constantinople struggled with dynastic difficulties encouraging strife between the Byzantines and the some Italian republics. Because of this Saladin was able to profit because provinces such as Genoa and Venice began seeking markets in Egypt thus allowing Saladin and his Muslim forces the advantage they needed to.(Saunders) After a battle in 1177 at Montgisard, the Christians prevailed but only with the aid of every man they could find. The Christian forces were losing ground and support and the Muslims under the rule of Saladin were growing rapidly (Paine 83).

During a famine in 1180, Saladin called for a truce which allowed him to strengthen his control and bring Muslim forces together. Saladin’s empire increased outside of Egypt and by 1183 he brought his capital to Damascus (Paine 84). But Saladin’s mission was to retake Jerusalem. The opportunity began to present itself in Jerusalem when the Kings leprosy began to advance. Because of the Christian king’s deterioration, two rival clans emerged among the Christians; one who favored an alliance with Saladin led by Reynold, the count of Tripoli, and one who did not want anything to do with Saladin. Reynold was resentful of the King because he had been deposed of the kingship and believed that if he aligned himself with Saladin he would be able to recover it (Maalouf 184).

After Nur ed-dins death, Saladin had absorbed part of his Syrian empire and created a “Syro-Egyptian Muslim Empire”.(Lewis) With this merger of Egypt and Syria, the men of war were pursuing war, yet the people of the lands were remaining peaceful (Maalouf 185). When the King finally died in 1185, he left his throne to a six year old, thus leaving Reynold to act as regent. This gave Saladin the opportunity to consolidate more power. Unfortunately, the child died after a year, ousting Reynold from his regency and instead placing a man in power who wanted nothing to do with an allegiance with Saladin (Maalouf 188).

The Holy City of Jerusalem came under attack by Saladin’s army in 1187. During Saladin’s time, arrows were the main weapons of choice. It is said that on the first day of battle, arrows filled the air on both sides. The battle waged on fiercely for two weeks until the Christians inside the walls of Jerusalem became weary. It was at this time that Saladin’s forces camped outside the Tower of David.(Richard)

Saladin saw that he was making little progress and was doing virtually no damage to the walls of impenetrable city. He and his aides decided to find the weak points in the city so that they had better measure when the next attack began. On September 26, Saladin ordered his camp to secretly be moved to the Vale of Jehosephat, on the Mount of Olives, and on Mount Joy, as well as throughout other hills on the outskirts of Jerusalem (Richard 209). Saladin believed that this tactical maneuver would give the Muslims an upper hand because the Christians would have believed that the Muslim armies had abandoned the battlefield. Saladin’s ploy was an artful military strategy that he had learned under the leadership of his uncle Shirkuh.

Upon seeing the emptiness around the city that had recently been surrounded by Muslim forces, the inhabitants of Jerusalem rejoiced. The people cried out, “The King of Syria has fled because he could not destroy the city as he planned!”(Richard 211). Saladin, seeing this as an opportunity to attack, ordered his men to surround the city. He also ordered olive branches and branches of other trees to be collected and placed between his army and the walls of the city. He planned for his attack to begin at nightfall, therefore sneaking up on the people inside the walls of Jerusalem. Saladin believed that by the time the Christians would be come aware of what was going on, his army would already be nuzzling the walls of Jerusalem (Setton 643).

Saladin also armed his cavalry with bows and arrows so that if the crusaders in the city attempted to escape or come over the walls to fight, they would not stand a chance. In a strategic military moves, Saladin ordered 10,000 men to go straight into the city. Anyone that was left was there solely to protect Saladin himself.

When everything was in order, Saladin attacked by way of the Tower of David. Because of the strategic military effort on Saladin’s part to keep his maneuvers secret, the people of Jerusalem expected nothing. They had left the walls unguarded and within minutes, Saladin’s forces had penetrate the walls of Jerusalem and taken back the Holy City into the fold of Muslim protection (Richard 267).

The Muslims were attacking continuously and effectively meeting no resistance and the Christians inside grew desperate. The Christian leaders assembled and decided to ask for safe-conduct out of the city, essentially handing Jerusalem over to Saladin. They sent a deputation of their lords and nobles to ask for terms, but when they spoke of it to Saladin he refused to grant their request. Saladin then took council with his advisors, all of whom were in favor of granting the assurances requested by the Christians, without forcing them to take extreme measures whose outcome could not be foreseen. “Let us consider them as being already our prisoners, and allow them to ransom themselves on terms agreed between us.” Saladin agreed to give the crusaders assurances of safety on the understanding that each man would pay ten dinar, children of both sexes two dinar and women five dinar. All who paid this sum within forty days could go free, and those who had not paid at the end of the time would be enslaved.(Brundage)

Once the city was taken and the infidels had left, Saladin ordered that the shrines should be restored to their original state. The Templars had built their living quarters against al-Aqsa, with storerooms and latrines and other necessary offices, taking up part of the area of al-Aqsa. This was all restored to its former state. Saladin ordered that the Dome of the Rock be cleansed of all pollution, and this was done.(Costello)

While Saladin’s legacy is the retaking of Jerusalem, he is also well known for his generosity and compassion. While he was a military genius and a warrior with a cause, he believed that all people were inherently good, simply misguided. The Christian crusaders who fought against him in the battle to retake Jerusalem were treated with kindness and Saladin made sure to keep every promise made to the inhabitants of the city. He agreed to a treaty allowing Europeans to hold ports on the Palestinian coast and also allowed Christians the right o make pilgrimages to Jerusalem. This taking back of Jerusalem was final in the eyes of the Muslims, and while the crusades lasted another hundred years, the Christian fervor towards the holy city waned as the renaissance and economic growth began to spread through Europe (Setton 621).

Jerusalem was a priority for Saladin but he also had other hopes during his reign. Saladin wanted to capture all of Palestine, but his goals were pushed aside as the next wave of crusaders came from Europe to attempt to steal Jerusalem back. With Richard the Lion heart and Philip Augustus laying siege and capturing Acre, Saladin knew that his dream to control Palestine would never happen.

Saladin’s personal strength made him the legendary figure that he is in the world of Islam today. His stories are legendary, and he is believed to have killed four hundred men in a single battle. Today, with the eyes of the world fixated on the Middle East, it is people like Saladin who should be remembered. His attempt to unify Syria and Egypt were noble and though his Syro-Egyptian empire tore apart during the Ayyubids reign, he was able to unite Egypt as a strong monarchy that is still present in today’s world (Lewis 167). It is people like Saladin who should be remembered for their love of Islam and love of Jerusalem. Saladin waged a true jihad to keep holy a city that is valued by multiple religions.

Works Cited

Brundage, James. The Crusades: A Documentary History. Marquette University Press, Milwaukee.1962. pps 159-63 .

Closson, Don. “The Crusades.” http://www.probe.org/content/view/115/91/

Costello, E. J. Arab Historians of the Crusades. Routledge and Kegan Paul. London. 1984

Lewis, Bernard. The Arabs in History. Oxford University Press. Oxford. 1993. pg240.

Maalouf, Amin. The Crusades Through Arab Eyes. Schocken Books. New York. 1984. pg292.

Paine, Michael. The Crusades. Trafalgar Square Publishing. Vermont. 2005. pg144.

Richard, J. The Crusades 1071-1291. Cambridge University Press. 1999.

Saunders, J.J. A History of Medieval Islam. Routledge Press. London. 2003. pg217.

Setton, K. A History of the Crusades. Volume 1. Milwaukee. University of Wisonson Press. 1969.

Yahoo. Education. “Saladin.” http://education.yahoo.com/reference/encyclopedia/entry/Saladin

Related

• The Crusades by Michael Paine
• A Dangerous Way of Life: Eating Disorders
• History of American Tourism
• The Early History of Hypnotism
• The History of American Capitalism
• History of Public Relations

In the United States, upwards of 30 people per year are executed by the government as punishment for criminal activity. Many other countries also use this method of punishment. The issues surrounding capital punishment have always been bridges to burn among the people of society, the Roman Catholic Church, different government representatives, and pretty much everyone else as well. No matter what aspect of the concept you wish to discuss, there are several different opinions that would arise regarding the situation. Some people feel that killing is immoral, no matter what the reasons backing it are. Some people have no moral obligation to it, but simply feel that it is not effective enough of a punishment. Still more people feel that there can be nothing more effective than completely eliminating a problem, and that these criminals do not deserve to live anyway. All of the differing opinions are undoubtedly attributable to the fact that killing of any kind is a moral thing, and a very controversial subject among people.

There are many things that make capital punishment such an easy thing for scores of people to disagree about. There are positives and negatives that any person (regardless of personal standpoint) can see by taking a step back from their own opinion of the issue and reviewing a number of cases of different executions.

Some people, for example, will see that there is always a chance that someone sentenced to death may be innocent and wrongfully accused. Anyone would say that in this case, if the person truly did not commit the crime, they should not die for it. This is an issue that is very real, and one of the reasons that the death penalty comes up as an arguing point among different groups of people at times. According to a study done by Columbia University, two out of three cases which are given a death penalty sentence are overturned upon appeal due to the discovery of serious error during the original judicial process leading to a wrongful conviction, or evidence showing that the death sentence is much too strong. (Bevilacqua)

Other people will cite botched executions as cruel and unjust punishment for any crime, and henceforth, in contrast with this nation’s constitution. Any person, once they have set aside their own opinions, can see that it is undeniably cruel to strap someone down and take all of the essentials to their living from them, yet somehow they still live, at least temporarily. Anyone can see how incredibly disgusting and inhumane it would be to be electrocuted with intent to take your life, and live through it. A person going through this would not be able to function, and would be in unbelievable pain, which makes for a good argument when this particular issue is raised about the death penalty.

Still, representing the other side of the coin, there are people that, despite not denying that cases such as the aforementioned do happen and aren’t good things, argue in favor of the use of capital punishment as the only surefire way to hinder crime from occurring, after all, no sane person could deny that a dead criminal will no longer commit crimes.

There are countless different arguments that any one person could come up with to defend their position regarding capital punishment. People formulate their ideas from many different things.

Many people take into consideration alignment with a political party. More often than not, Democrats tend to be against the punishment of crimes by death, while the traditional Republican viewpoint is that it should be supported.

Other people base their standpoint on the issue based on their own morality, or what they were raised to believe is right and wrong. Some think that since those punished by death are almost always those accused of first degree murder, they deserve to die; they hold sort of an “eye for an eye” mentality, while some believe that it is wrong to kill any human being, and the death penalty is inexcusable regardless of the circumstances.

Still others turn to their religious faith’s ideas concerning the topic to guide them in making up their own mind about the issue. According to Father Jud Weiksnar of the Franciscan Center for Social Concern at St. Bonaventure University, Catholic social teaching tells us that the Catholic faith as a whole is opposed to the taking of any life, be it of an unborn baby in the case of abortion, or of a convicted murderer in the case of capital punishment. This said, it becomes obvious that many Catholics would be opposed to capital punishment.

The combination of many different viewpoints, however, that one person may be exposed to and drawn to is what will help them to make up their own mind on an issue. All in all, a 2001 poll shows us that since 1965, opposition to the death penalty has dropped. In 1965 38% of Americans supported it, while in 2001, 67% did.

So, what is the Catholic Church’s official stance on the issue? As I mentioned already, Catholic social teaching tells us to respect all of God’s creations. Upon the list of God’s creations of course would be human life, and so according to Catholic social teaching, the death penalty is wrong. A written statement from Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua in the year 2000 tells us that, “Executing a killer doesn’t bring closure or healing.” Bevilacqua goes on to say that the Church has always acknowledged the right of a state to impose capital punishment on those accused, tried, and convicted of a crime worthy of the punishment by the state. He says that past teachings of the Church recognized the benefits of the death penalty toward helping to protect a society, and the good of its entire people. He says that the Church continues to uphold this teaching, which confused me, however, he goes on to say that the Church simply upholds that a state has the RIGHT to practice capital punishment. He says that current Catholic teaching does not condone the exercising of this right, and that the Church now recognizes other methods of protecting societies as superior to the usage of capital punishment.

The Church’s stance against the death penalty is based on the same principles as their opposition to abortion, euthanasia, and assisted suicide. This continuity makes Catholic social teaching simple to follow and a sensible way to create one’s own stance on these issues. The teaching simply says that all of God’s creation is to be respected, which I mentioned earlier, and that these things do not respect human life, and are therefore not morally right.

I agree with the Church’s teaching about the death penalty. While I do not totally agree with the respect of God’s creations aspect of it, I agree that the death penalty is probably not the most effective method of punishment in terms of protecting a society. Any society that tries to cancel out a murder by murdering the murderer just has way too much killing and this is seen by all of the people. Desensitization to killing and death is something that will probably not help a society to become a safer place.

The reason I say that I do not fully agree with the Church’s teaching is that, while agreeing with the death penalty portion of their teaching, I am pro-choice when it comes to abortion (in some cases). I feel that if a woman is raped, or will not be able to raise a child in suitable living conditions, she should have the choice to abort the child’s birth before it reaches a fetal stage. I understand (like the Church teaches) that this is still a living organism, and a creation of God, but I think that the circumstances make abortion excusable, though probably not the best solution to the problem.

Again, I am in agreement with the Church’s teaching, and I think that Catholic social teaching concerning the right to life of man is something that should be further stressed and burned into the minds of Americans (even though we have separation of church and state, and I am not religious at all). I think that statistics showing 67% of Americans being in favor of murders carried out in their name are startling, and people need an influence like the Catholic social teachings to change this statistic.

Related

In that respect, L. Ron Hubbard was a genius. An epically poor student, Hubbard failed all of his courses in the fields of physics and atomic theory. After this colossal defeat, Hubbard wisely abandoned his education immediately following his first semester of college. Marginally educated but unemployed, he became a writer of westerns and few other subjects. However, the real money lay in Science Fiction. Hubbard tried his hand.

Science fiction writing in the late 1930′s was a very taxing job. Moreover, writing for magazines like ‘Astounding Science Fiction’ required competition with big league contributing writers with names like Heinlein, van Vogt and Asimov. Worse yet, the editor of the journal, John W. Campbell, was a fact driven nit-picker who required everything to be at least marginally feasibly given known scientific fact. For Hubbard, who had so epically foundered his mind upon the rocks of the scientific method, this was an unforgiving and unfamiliar medium to engage.

The story of Henry Mudge was almost entirely philosophical, with the most complex scientific theories being those of simple gravity and perhaps the occasional vacuum. Luckily, this was fiction, and his stories of psychic travel were only loosely related to scientific theories and so skimmed gracefully over a bar that Hubbard had quite obviously set as low as possible.

While failures necessitate innovation, there is also the adage, ‘If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’. Hubbard’s ensuing works satisfied this advice perfectly. If not Scientific, Hubbard’s story was indeed a big hit with his audience and by the end of 1939, he had produced a trilogy that expounded upon his original idea only enough to ensure publication.

Hubbard’s next piece, ‘The Tramp’, starred a wandering vagrant by the name of Doughface Jack. Jack suffered severe head injury necessitating the installation of a metal plate in his head. The result is an almost predictable attainment of god like telekenetic powers and an ensuing tail of personal responsibility.

After this point, the Hubbard’s writing took second place to his search for a lost manuscript. Back in 1938, Hubbard had supposedly written a book that would out-shine the bible in both philosophical content and humanitarian advice. The book was apparently one that would change the way humans interacted with one another. The book was named Excalibur. It was also, apparently, written by Hubbard.

His quest for the lost book of “Excalibur” soaked up a huge amount of his time, and was only interrupted by Hubbard entering in to the navy in 1941.(Cordyn 22-36)

After this Hubbard falls of the radar. After a debatable stint in the Navy, he emerged again in 1948 with perhaps his most important piece of writing:, the one for which he will no doubt remain famous for as long as humans can read.(Miller)

Dianetics took the world by storm. It was not so much a story as a new way medicine. Hubbard took the most gripping elements of his previous stories and spun them into a science, a new way of solving problems that required no other professional training. In essence, Dianetics divided the brain in half. The first half, the analytic mind, is the part of the brain that deals with societal philosophy, charity and complex interaction. The Analytic mind, according to Hubbard, is the brain we use in our day-to-day life, and the brain that we are aware of, much like the Freudian notion of the ‘superego’. The second section of the brain, the Reactive mind, matches almost exactly with the Id. The reactive mind governs only the most basic desire of the human; to survive. However, with such a simple goal the reactive mind is quite easily confused and therefore corrupted. This confusion of the Reactive mind, and the mistakes that it makes, forms the core of Dianetics. All of life’s problems, from schizophrenia to the common cold, come as a result of ‘engrams’. Engrams are injected into the brain when the subconscious, or “reactive brain” is in charge. (Cordyn 350)Therefore, engrams are mental injuries suffered as a result of lapses in lucidity. These lapses are caused by many things, from simple blows to the head or even just feeling tired. According to the video, “Dianetics and You”, the most powerful engrams are created during periods of “chemical interference”, caused by drugs, alcohol, and particularly pharmaceuticals. (Lucinta)

Dianetics was explicit in the idea that professional help, particularly that of Psychologists and Psychiatrists, was to be shunned at all costs. Instead of counseling, the way to health lay in truth and understanding. However, this truth and understanding came as an entirely relative outlook. Because people are all different, the only way to spot the influence of an engram is through introspection. Moreover, unless ‘properly trained’, attempting to aid others can accomplish very little at best and at worst; more engrams.(Lucinta)

The response was predictable. The New York Times reported a statement by the APA, simply warning that not one aspect of Dianetics had foundation in any branch of science. However, since Hubbard had carefully crafted his new idea along the Freudian notion of true until proven false, nobody paid much heed. Moreover, since anyone who bought into Dianetics was already steeled against the crafty ways of the world’s evil Psychologists, the message affected nobody.(Miller)

The stone rolled on. Over the next year Hubbard expounded upon his original fantastic philosophy, producing a flurry of booklets and advice with titles such as “Self Analysys”, “”The Science of Survival” and “Notes on the Lectures of L. Ron Hubbard”. These booklets gave rise to the science of auditing. In Dianetic philosophy, the only true professional help was the Auditor. Auditors could interview or test people and in doing so identifiy and hopefully eliminate engrams. More importantly, an Auditor can detect past lives and list the reincarnations of a patient. The training was intense, requiring extensive reading in a series of axiom manuals available at competetively priced bookstores nationwide. (Fishman)

By 1952, Hubbards research in the new field of Dianetics led him to the second stage of his crusade. At some point during this year, the unprovable science of Dianetics transformed into the original unprovable, religion. Now called Scientology, Hubbard’s teachings expanded upon those set forth years before in his original short stories. Through proper auditing and intense studying of Hubbard’s work, people were capable of attaining levels of awareness and mental ability previously unimaginable to mortals. Dubbed ‘Clear’, this mental state was the Nirvana-esque state towards which all Scientologists strove. (Robinson)

Scientology also began to develope a rather complex mysticism. Hubbard needed more than his own work to substantiate the history of Scientology. The result was an almost epic tale chronicling not just the history of the world, but also that of the universe. The story was fantastic not just in the philosophical implications but also for its total deviation from all scientific fact leading up to or preceding it.

Microwave Anisotropy estimates the universe at being roughly 13.7 billion years old. Contemporary research into the carbon-nitrogen-oxygen shows that the universe might actually be almost one billion years older than that. Of course, even with the most liberal estimates of the effect of redshift and Planck units, using even the most extreme temperature deviations feasible, the universe in its current form weighs in at 16.4 billion years. Earth, the little blue ball floating about the Milky Way, is equally respectable at 4.57 billion years of age. Luckily, Ronald was privy to new information, what with having access to his past reincarnations; men such as Descartes, John Locke, and of course, the Archbishop of Mars.(Hubbard Jr.)

60 Trillion years ago, there was this universe.(Cornyn 300)

In 85,000,000 BCE, there existed a Galactic Confederation, spanning 76 planets. Xenu’s popularity was flagging and there were plans to remove him from power. Near the top of the list of grievances was the issue of overpopulation. Each planet had a population of between 178 and 250 billion people. Naturally, that caused problems. To save his flagging popularity, Xenu devised a plan to save the universe. Using misleading data “by means of circuits”, Xenu loaded up ‘most’ of the thirteen quadrillion people onto exact copies of DC-8s and sent them to Teegeeack(Earth). This is the beginning of what high level scientologists call ‘Incident Two’.

On Teegeeack, Xenu unloaded societies undesirables near dormant volcanoes. There is no scientific data on the physics of fitting large quantities of people into small spaces, but luckily Hubbard at this point stops using specific numbers. The volcanoes were then rigged with Hydrogen bombs, at which point Xenu got into a DC-8 with some of his cronies and, once safely outside of Teegeeack’s atmosphere, blew the whole place up.

Naturally, there was public outrage. There was a massive schism across the Galactic Confederation between those who approved of the Draconian measures set forth by Xenu and those who were concerned that between one and thirteen quadrillion people had just been destroyed. The ensuing war raged for almost six years. After this, Xenu was electronically locked in a mountain on earth. Of course, earth was also full billions if not trillions of lost souls. Each soul yearned to regain the consciousness once had. The result was that the few remaining humans were totally engulfed in unclaimed souls. These souls, or ‘thetans’, attempt to prise there way into our mind and are part of what causes an Engram. More importantly, Xenu had been contained.

The mountain is unknown, and since that time, the area once used as a landing strip has become a desert. Moreover, this story was deemed so traumatic that the Galactic Federation hid it in a secret location, and guarded it further with a ‘psychological lock’. If an untrained person attempts to read this tail to verify the facts or worse yet, locate Xenu, they will whither away and die of pneumonia and insomnia. Hubbard survived this ordeal, though knocked into deep uncousciousness, making him the first person in history to do this. In other words, out of concern for the rest of humanity, there is no way to prove any of what forms the foundation of Scientology. (Cordyn 364-367)

Moreover for the rest of Scientology, secrets such as this one are guarded quite closely. Because most information regarding the work of the mind is highly dangerous, access to Hubbard’s higher level teachings are restricted only to those who have shown enthusiasm and talent in the ways of Dianetics. In other words, only those who seem sufficiently gullible are allowed access to the more ridiculous facts. The culmination of the brainwashing is attained only when the Scientologist cuts off all ties with non-Scientologists and goes on a journey with Sea Org, the cruise ship navy of the Church of Scientology. In the middle of the ocean, cut off from all critical onlookers or dissenting opinions, the final step is taken and only here can the final stages of ‘Clear’ be reached.(Beher)

Key to the higher levels of Scientology is secrecy surrounding all information possessed by the Church. Dianetic enlightenment is attainable only through having personal copies of his texts and notes. Curiously, the Church required members to buy copies from bookstores or the church itself. At no point in Scientology is information given out for free. In fact, the only way most information about the inner workings of the church was not through the 1993 court order, forbidding tax-exempt enterprises (specificially Scientology) from restricting access to it’s knowledge, so much as the information given by defectors from the religion.(Fishman) However, through careful copyright work and a generously funded legal department, many attempts to spread information to the public are stifled with legal harassment and outright threats. Dissenting views are never heard out and often stamped out in the most vicious manner permissable by law.

The Church of Scientology’s tax-exempt status was no small source of controversy. With an annual revenue of over 503 million dollars (in 1987), and expenses that include a fleet of personal jets and the private navy, Sea Org, the huge amount of funding and auxiliary expenses which raised more than a few eyebrows. In 1968, the IRS performed an audit of its own. The result was a lengthy investigation which deemed that though no obvious law breaking had occurred, The Church was not deserving of it’s tax-exempt status. Hubbard’s response was very informative. Enraged that anyone would question his methods, he started a movement to infiltrate the IRS.(Beher) Dubbed ‘Operation Whiteout’, the goal was to load the government agency with as many spies, moles, and Church members as possible. However, the IRS caught wind of this and, in 1972, retaliated with a series of high level arrests including Hubbard’s wife at the time, Sue Elliot Hubbard. Six Church members were sent to a federal prison and in 1985, Hubbard himself was indicted for tax fraud. (Time)Fingered out by high level defectors and identified in the few unshredded documents found for skimming as much as $200 million from church bank accounts, Hubbard escaped prosecution only by escaping in what Church leader David Miscaviage called “a transformation to the highest existence” and the Los Angeles Country Coroners office called ‘death’. No autopsy was permitted.(Time)

Scientology as it currently exists servers as nothing more than a reworked Catholic church. In order to stay ahead of the current scientific facts, Hubbard simply created an alternate system. Dealing with philosophy only rather than empirical fact, there is no way to prove or disprove it. Moreover, despite court orders for disclosure, Scientology’s higher level teachings remain totally secret. The only way to see the inner workings of the clock is to become a part of it. Moreover, due to the increasingly delicate auditing process, the only way to attain higher levels of information is to exhibit increasing gullibility. Art Bell, a serious journalist of the fantastic, once said, “Fantastic claims require fantastic evidence.” Scientology’s claims of grandeur are based only on philosophical hypotheses with no real world anchor. If billions of people died on earth, where are the bones? Where is the radioactive fallout? Where is the trash left by lost civilizations and the empty DC-8′s? More importantly, where is the rest of the Galactic Confederacy? Why has a government spanning the entire galaxy forgotten about such a historically significant planet as Teegeeack? There is no fantastic evidence and at best, no definitive proof of this catastrophe.

Ignorance aside, Scientology despises critics. Skeptics of scientology are despised and are termed ‘non people’ in Church literature (Hubbard Jr.). Scientologists are ordered to not talk to such people at the orders of Hubbard himself. In fact, when L. Ron Hubbard Jr. left the church he was disowned by his father and resultantly cut out from the sizeable family endowment, raised by books sales and embezzlement of million of dollars from Scientology revenue. Others, such as Time magazine, were hit by libel suits. In the case of Time magazine, the judge threw the case out, but in many instances, the simple threat of legislation ant he related expenses are enough to silence most dissenting opinion. In one case, the Church went as far as to deposition the first grade teacher of Paulette Cooper, herself indited in twenty seven lawsuits, for writing a book called “The Scandal of Scientology”. The Church spent almost half a million dollars in the lawsuit, designed, in Hubbard’s words, “not to get justice so much as overwhelm”(Hubbard Jr). The Church is not so much afraid of incorrect data, but that it is aggressive towards any information outside of it’s control. In fact, Scientology has, through legal harassment alone, browbeaten Google into removing much Xenu.net from its database, and though it has since been restored, no sign of the site can be found on the Internet Archive web.archive.org. Perhaps more telling of the fallacy inherent in Scientology is Hubbard’s own tract, “Critics of Scientology”. The entire basis for stifling argument, Hubbard claims, is to find dirt on the accuser (Clambake). In short, the entire basis for dodging the bullet is to construct an Ad Hominem argument (Sagan). When Scientology does make a case for itself, it chooses to use the logical fallacies and intimidation.

Despite all evidence against it, Scientology has enjoyed truly amazing conversion rates. This is no doubt due to its public face. When the public thinks ‘Scientology’, they think Tom Cruise, John Travolta, and the philanthropic Civil Engineer and Nuclear Physicist L. Ron Hubbard. However, these people are but the point of the pyramid. The thousands of ruined families abandoned by converts, the dead body of Lisa McPherson found in the LA Celebrity Center, and the college failure, fiction writing adulterous womanizer with a pathetic Naval career and a history of money laundering and drug abuse are gone from the picture.(Hubbard Jr.) These cold realities are hidden from view. Instead, people are pointed towards the rich, famous and dishonest. Initiates are dazzled by promises to be ‘just like the stars.’

Moreover, the church goes out of it’s way to target the weak willed. Groups such as Narconon and Criminon pose as charity organizations nationwide. Often found in prisons, the two organizations pose as treatment for drug addicts and convicted criminal drug users. The result is not so much treatment as a systematic targeting of the desperate and weak willed to be inducted into the expensive world of Scientology.(Clambake)

Another curious fact is the attempt to pass off Scientology as a “non interferent” religion. In other words, new initiates to the science of the church are told that the workings of Scientology in no way conflict with those of other religions. Moreover, the study of Scientology will help secular converts understand more about those in history who became ‘Clear’ on their own (Jesus, Buddha and Mohamed).(Lucinta) This, of course, it part of a bait and switch method by which the Church suckers in converts with false hopes. Only when the prey is well and truly ensnared do they request deviation from current religion.

Church, of course, is a very liberal term. In truth, Scientology Celebrity Centers and Churches operate more like a bookstore or library than an actual place of worship. The Dallas facility is crammed with book after book, all of which are labeled with the according level of understanding required and, perhaps obviously, a price tag. The books are expensive. The simple ‘Dianetics Starter Kit’, an introductory to the basic “science” of the Church consists of a book, a CD, a video and some pamphlets, and costs approximately fifty dollars. Moreover, the resulting series of book purchases required to achieve even the most rudimentary understanding of the religion requires takes, at least a further two hundred dollars. From even the most grass roots centers, the primary goal is to push product: to sell Hubbard’s books.

There is only one thing more expensive than the books; auditing. The only true path to enlightenment, auditing proves to be a high resource endeavor. Because of the increasing difficulty in identifying thetans and embedded engrams, the audits get progressively more expensive. Ex-Scientologist Steven Fishman claims that, during the midst of his ‘brainwashing’, he paid bills of up to ten thousand dollars for a single auditing session. In fact, calculations show, that, in order to audit at the highest level, one must spend at the very least, a sum in the nature of two hundred thousand dollars. More is usually the case (Beher). Other religions, such as Catholicism, offer a similar service, known as “confession” for absolutely no charge at all. Being the only universal truth apparently allows Scientology to charge money for help.

Perhaps the most ironic thing about Scientology, the critics are the only people involved who do not sell their advice. Many high level defectors of Scientology have made their information public; available for little or no cost whatsoever. Prominent ex-Scientologists Steven Fishman and L. Ron Hubbard Jr. both have made all of their works publicly available online. Surely, if The Church of Scientology truly cared about saving people, they too would make all of their information free. However, since media produced by the Church are under the copyright of Bridge Publications, the books are private and legally protected information.(Beher) The only reasonable assumption is that, though the Church could easily publish their information online, they choose not to is to keep the profits generated by the sale of texts. Moreover, members nearing completion of OT:3, the highest state of clarity, are required to purchase the final tracts for a sum no less than on hundred thousand dollars(Ward). No other charlatan has peddled its wares for such an epic financial return.

There is nothing wrong with making fantastic claims. Wrong, but not evil, people can also say things that are untrue. The problem comes when myth translates into reality. Scientology is a fine little pseudo science, which, on its own, threatens nobody. The problem comes when believers are instructed to abandon their friends and family, and to donate huge amounts of time and resources into not just the church, but also to the recruiting of new members. Then, the philosophy ceases to be a dream and commences a public nuisance, in this case with dire results. Scientology is responsible for the appropriation of millions of dollars from gullible idealists, who are fed a string of lies and false promises. Scientology has sent people to prison, has hounded its critics, and at every turn been completely resistant to criticism from the outside. The preface to Carl Sagan’s ‘Demon Haunted World’ reads, “All our science, measured against reality, is primitive and childlike – and yet it is the most precious thing we have”. If value is scaled by measuring correspondence with reality, Scientology is worthless. If value is measured on altruistic benefit, Scientology is evil. If a religion is based on its benefit to society, Scientology is the new Satanism. It preys upon the weak and ignorant for the sole purpose of financial gain. Scientology is not the first charlatan, but it is the most profitable. In that alone, Scientology deserves applause.

Works Cited

Beher, Richard. The Thriving Cult of Greed and Power. Time Magazine May 6, 1991.

Bridge Publications. Dianetics and You: An introduction to the Modern Mind. Bridge Publications New York, NY.

Cordyn, Brent and Hubbard, L. Ron Jr. L. Ron Hubbard : Messiah or Madman?. Barricade Books, Fort Lee, NJ.

Dianetics and The Modern Medicine. Bridge Publications.

Fishman, Steven. “The Fishman Affidavit“.

Foster, Sir John. Report of the Enquiry into the Practice and Effects of Scientology.

Interview With L. Ron Hubbard Jr. Penthouse Magazine p.74, June 1983.

Interview and Tour of Dallas Celebrity Center with Minster Roberta Lucinta October 5, 2005.

Miller, Russel. Bare-Faced Messiah.

Operation Clambake. http://www.xenu.net.

Paret, Peter. The Makers of Modern Strategy: From Machiavelli to the Nuclear Age. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.

Robinson, Michael. A Summary and Analyses of the OT Documents.

Sagan, Carl. The Demon Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark, Random House.

Ward, Gary. Summary of: Revolt in the Stars by L. Ron Hubbard

Related

• The Ancient Religion of Hinduism
• Death Penalty vs. Catholicism

There are two trinities of the Hindu faith, which are the three Hindu gods and the three Hindu goddesses or wives. Krishna is the eighth divine incarnation of Vishnu, the second god of the first Hindu trinity. Krishna is one of the most popular deities worshipped in Hinduism. Krishna is to the Hindus as Jesus Christ is to the Christians. According to the Hindu Legend, Krishna came down to earth as a human baby to be crucified and die for the sake of mankind. Yes you heard that right, Krishna was also crucified and died for mankind just like Jesus did.

Now back to the principal of the double Hindu trinity. That brings us to the Star of David. Two triangles linked together, one upside down and the other right side up. It originally was a symbol of Hinduism that represented that three Hindu gods Brahman, Vishnu, and Shiva and the three Hindu goddesses or the wives. The Jews adopted the six pointed star from the Hindus and transformed it into the Star of David. But originally the six pointed star was the symbol for the double trinity of Hinduism. Most people do not realize that and it is a very little known fact. But it is true.

Lakshmi, the wife of Vishnu, is the goddess of love, riches, and prosperity. She is known as the most beautiful goddess of the Hindu pantheon. She is usually depicted standing on top of a huge lotus flower in the middle of the ocean pouring gold coins on top of her followers. She is blessing her people with earthly riches and gold and prosperity.

There is an elephant headed god in the Hindu faith known as Ganesh. There is a story in the hindu scriptures of how he got that elephants head. One time the wife of Shiva, Parvati, wanted to take a perfumed bath. So she told her son, Ganesh, to guard the front door so no one would walk in on her. So he started guarding the door when her husband Shiva finally arrived home. Ganesh did not recognize his father and would not let him enter so Shiva finally cut off his son Ganesh’s head and walked in the house. Parvati was furious with her husband Shiva. She told him with great anger and rage to go out and the first animal that he sees to kill it and cut off it’s head and put the head on the shoulders of their son Ganesh so he will come back to life again. And as the story goes, the first animal that Shiva saw was an elephant. So he cut off the elephant’s head and put it on the shoulders of his son Ganesh and he came back to life and Ganesh has had that elephant’s head ever since.

One of the main and most well doctrines of Hinduism is the cycle of rebirth and reincarnation. The Hindus believe that we are reborn on this earth many times. There is also another doctrine that is related to this known as karma. In other words, what goes around comes around. The Hindus say that whatever actions you took in your previous life affects what happens in your next life when you are reborn again. That is why in India there is a Hindu class system. There are four to five different ranks to the class system. The highest class are the Hindu priests, the second to the highest is the military. The two lowest classes are the farmers and the servants.

There is another class which I guess you could say is the absolute lowest but they are actually outcasts of the society so they do not even belong to the class system. They are known as the untouchables and they are the lowest of the low. The Hindus believe that whatever class you are born in is because of how good or bad of a person you were in your most recent previous life. If you were a really bad person and did evil things in your next life you will be born as an untouchable. But if you live an almost perfect life and do almost nothing but good things in your next life you will be born at the top of the class system and you will be born a priest.

That is a brief overview of the beautiful religious faith of Hinduism. As you can see it is a very interesting faith and I myself have always been fascinated by it. It is the oldest religion in the world and hopefully it will live on until the end of time.

Related

• An Investigation into the World of L. Ron Hubbard and his Religion of Scientology

In able to understand the Taoist’s way of thinking, one must first understand the underlying concepts of Taoism and from there learn to apply it. Anyone that has read the Tao will say that the book is extremely simple. The writing is simple, the language is simple, and the themes are simple. The Tao Te Ching uses nature to express this simplicity, an extremely important theme of Taoism. The Tao describes how, like nature, one should be in balance, harmony, and simple. Verse 37 of the Tao Te Ching quotes how “People would be content with their simple, everyday lives, in harmony, and free of desire. When there is no desire, all things are at peace” (Mitchell, 39). Like Buddhist’s beliefs, Taoism also emphasizes how desire complicates people’s daily lives. Desire complicates actions that are taken and contaminate our minds. This complexity should be replaced by simplicity so that we may be more content.

When values such as, balance, harmony, and simplicity are met, they guide us to live a life of integrity. By living in such a way, we learn to be an exceptional ruler, teacher, or being. For example, verse 17 explains what a great ruler should be like. According to the Tao, the greatest leaders are those that are unknown to their subjects. The leader should organize matter in harmony with the Tao, and the subjects will go about their daily work. In the end the people will say “Amazing: we did it, all by ourselves!” By being in harmony, the leader is also able to trust his subjects more. The Tao says “if you don’t trust the people, you make them untrustworthy.” Having both party’s content is what makes a leader exceptional.

Along with simplicity, Taoism also teaches nothingness and emptiness through the concept of wu wei. Wu is defined as ‘not’ or ‘without.’ Wei is then defined as “to do, to make, or to cause” (http://www.thetao.info/tao/weiwuwei.htm) Literally translating the meaning of the two words is ‘acting upon something.’ In Taoism, the phrase wu wei can be interpratated as meaning ‘to act but not to possess the act.’ The meaning of not possessing the act is simply that one should not be attached to the outcome of the action. One should simply just act, not thinking of what that action will bring to them. “It means to follow the flow of nature, without trying. Rather than constantly trying to fight situations and control them, which is unnatural and self-defeating, it is better to understand the true nature of the Tao, behaving completely naturally and in tune with the natural order of things” (http://www.thetao.info/tao/). If wu wei is applied fully, the student should be able to feel the having done nothing really is having done everything.

Simplicity and wu wei are not only used as central themes for Taoism but also used to apply to the definition of happiness, or at least what Taoist believe to be happiness. The Tao explains the easiest way, the first baby steps, to achieve this state of simplicity. In order to be completely content we should “throw away holiness and wisdom, and people will be a hundred times happier. Throw away morality and justice, and people will do the right thing. Throw away industry and profit, and there won’t be any thieves” (Mitchell, 21). Our materials, thoughts, actions, rules, and regulations are what bring us discontentment. If we are without these, it is almost as if we are without anything. We are caught up in trying to obtain the ‘very best’ of everything in life. We constantly compare and contrast. If something doesn’t match up to our standards we than become unsatisfied with the outcome. The Taoist way of thinking says that we should get rid of these wants or desires from life. When we limit ourselves from our greatest desires, we are able to achieve moments of the purest simplicity. By seeing our desires in a simple manner, we will not only be much happier with the results but we will also learn to make the right choices.

When we realize that we are making the right decisions, without outside sources telling us from the right and wrong, we are in harmony with our actions. Generally people that are able to recognize the Tao are said to be in harmony with their actions because they are enlightened. Enlightenment occurs when the Tao is recognized. By being true to the Tao one can remain simple. “If powerful men and women could remain centered in the Tao, all things would be in harmony. The world would become a paradise. All people would be at peace, and the law would be written in their hearts” (Mitchell, 35) further verse 32 continues to say that “all things end in the Tao as rivers flow into the sea” (Mitchell, 35). Ultimately, to be in the simplest form is to be true to the Tao.

The ways of the Master in the Tao Te Ching also give guidelines to bringing about happiness. The Master uses the wu wei concept to teach happiness. When actions are not tied to their consequences, the action becomes less significant. The desires to achieve the action disappear and we are left with nothingness. When we “practice not doing, everything will fall into place” (Mitchell, 5). And having everything in place keeps us happy, without us even knowing that we have achieved happiness through no-action. Made even simpler, having nothing done is equivalent to having nothing left undone. The Master is able to achieve her happiness acting “without doing anything and teaches without saying anything. Things arise and she lets them come; things disappear and she lets them go. She has but doesn’t posses, acts but doesn’t expect. When her work is done, she forgets it. That is why it lasts forever” (Mitchell, 4). She remains content through wu wei.

Although Taoism falls under the category as one of China’s top three religions, it can be used as a tool in today’s society. The philosophical aspect of Taoism can be used as a guide to how one should deal with situations that arise. In example, the simplicity theme teaches one to slow down the fast paste of today’s world. The people in today’s society remain on a constant ‘I’ve got to go’ pattern. People are busy all the time out either working or doing recreational activities to fulfill their desires. The Taoist way of life teaches to let all of those desires go. The Taoist way teaches to remain in harmony and to see things in simplicity by comparing or even being in one with nature —the truest simplicity in life. By today’s standard of living this goal seems to be near impossible. Yet, the Tao simply says to “be content with what you have; rejoice in the way things are. When you realize there is nothing lacking, the whole world belongs to you” (Mitchell, 46).

When viewed philosophically, Taoism clashes a great deal with Confucianism. Both are classified as a religion but are viewed more as a philosophy. However, Confucian way of thinking does make distinct differences from Taoist way of thinking. Confucianism speaks more of the superior man, a morally solidified character. Referred to as a “gentleman,” this character is often striving to reach perfection. Whereas, in Taoism there is no superior man or perfection. Letting all things go, being free of desire, applying the concepts of simplicity and wu wei is what one should be striving for. Another major difference between the two ways of thinking is that Confucianism puts emphasis on virtue and jen (the goodness of all) or humanity. In order to help the self achieve goals, others must be helped as well. Taoism differs in that humanity is not a goal one should seek. Taoism’s emphasis is more on becoming one with the Tao through applying the concepts such as simplicity and wu wei.

Taoism had gained much popularity in the West as well as spreading further in the East. More than a religion, Taoism should be thought of as a philosophy about the nature of life and personal behavior.

Related