अहिंसासत्यास्तेयब्रह्मचर्यापरिग्रहा यमाः॥३०॥
ahiMsaa = non-violence; satya = truthfulness; asteya = refraining from stealing; brahmacharya = celibacy; aparigrahaaH = refraining from acquisition or coveting; yamaaH = the absentions
Sw. Satchidananda
"Yama consists of non-violence, truthfulness, non-stealing, continence, and non-greed."
Ahimsa is not causing pain, not non-killing as mentioned by some authors. Himsa means to cause pain. Causing pain through words or thoughts can be even more harmful than killing. Truthfulness and non-stealing seem elementary, but are in fact "elephantry". They should not be considered mild as they are hard to perfect. Aparigraha can be translated in two ways – non-hoarding or accumulation beyond need, or non-acceptance of gifts.
Bryant
"The Yamas are nonviolence, truthfulness, refrainment from stealing, celibacy, and renunciation of [unnecessary] possessions."
Ahimsa (non-violence)
- Ahimsa was the main theme of Gandhi’s non-cooperation movement in bringing freedom to India from the British.
- Vyasa and other commentators declare ahimsa to be the most important of all the yamas and leads the list given by Patanjali.
- As per Vyasa, the goal of other yamas is to achieve ahimsa and enhance it.
- Vyasa defines ahimsa as not injuring any living creature anywhere at any time. However, one must continue to perform one’s dharma even though it might mean harming small insects and bacteria etc.
- Yogis should abstain from eating meat which involves nourishing one’s body by eating the flesh of other living beings.
- Jains have taken the concept of ahimsa further than any other tradition in history. They take precautions not to harm even insects and animals. The avoid eating after sunset, they sweep the floor in front while walking on the ground, they cover their mouth and nose with cloth to avoid eating/inhaling insects etc. This is based on the Hindu belief that all living being contain an atman (soul) and all atmans are spiritually equal.
- A sattvic person never thinks of inflicting injury upon others as he understands the karmic consequence of violence.
- Ahimsa also encompasses giving up thoughts of malice and hatred as these produce tendency to hurt others through words or actions.
Satya (Truth)
- Vyasa defines truth as one’s words and thoughts being in correspondence with fact as known through the three means of knowledge (pramana) – from sense perception, inference, verbal testimony.
- Speech should not be deceitful, misleading or devoid of value. It should benefit and not harm anybody. As Manu says in his Manusmriti, "Let him not speak what is true but unkind; let him not speak what is kind but untrue". (*see the Sanskrit verse below)
- A common example quoted is the one from Mahabharata where when Drona asks of Yudhishthira (righteous son of dharma, known to speak the truth always) if his son, Ashwatthama was dead, Yudhishthira simply replied "yes, Ashwatthama is dead". This was truthful to the extent that the elephant by that name had died. However, the meaning conveyed to Drona was that his son had died. This is considered as misleading as it lead to great harm to Drona and his downfall.
- Since we are always trying to follow ahimsa, truth should not hurt either. In case of apparent conflict between ahimsa and the other yamas, ahimsa should take preference.
Asteya (non-stealing)
Asteya is not taking things belonging to others and not even having a desire to do so. Having a desire may ultimately lead one to stealing. Even if you find a treasure trove of jewels it should not be taken as it doesn’t belong to you.
Brahmacharya (Celibacy)
Vyasa defines Brahmacharya as the control of the sexual organs. Some commentators include not seeing, speaking with, embracing or otherwise interacting with members of the opposite sex as objects of desire. Vyasa alludes to eight kinds of sexual indulgences – thinking, talking, joking about, looking passionately at members of opposite sex, talking secretly about, engaging in, attempting to do so, actual performance of sex. Ultimate self realization is not possible for one actively engaged in sex.
Aparigraha (renunciation of possessions)
Vyasa defines Aparigraha as the ability to see the problems caused by acquisition, preservation, and destruction of things, since these provoke attachment and injury. Possessions produce samskaras which activate in the future to cause distress if we can’t acquire items desired by us or losing the items that we possess. Yogis are advised to acquire only what is required for basic maintenance and give up all else.
Discussion
It is worth noting that Patanjali has provided us only the list of yamas and niyama. He does not provide any definition for these. It is safe to assume that Patanjali, while teaching the students who must have already spent a fair amount of time with him, would have covered these basic yamas and niyamas before teaching them the concepts of yoga through the yoga sutras. Various authors have taken it upon themselves to provide their own definition and understanding of these basic values in their commentaries.
While describing Ahimsa, Bryant states that being a vegetarian is an absolute requirement for an aspiring yogi. I was trying to find out if there is any scriptural reference to back this claim. There is no such mention in some of the popular yoga-related texts, e.g., Bhagavad Gita, Yoga Sutra or the Hatha Yoga Pradipika. I would like to find out if any of the ancient scriptures categorically prohibit meat-eating.
*"Satyam bruyat priyam bruyat, na bruyat satyam apriyam;
Priyam cha na anritam (asatya) bruyat esh dharmah sanatanah."
HI, Thank you for such a great resource on the Yoga Sutras. I came across your website recently and it is very helpful to me. In reference to a scriptural reference to being the vegetarian, I think such a reference will be very difficult to find. I believe that one of the reasons is that the yoga scriptures, in general, do not have a “forbidding tone”. The Bhagavad Gita, for example, mentions food in Chapter 17, and categorises food as Sattvic, Rajasic and Tamasik, without specifically forbidding one to eat meat. The tone of the scriptures is that of providing a direct link/direction between action and consequence, they tell us “if you do this, this will happen, if you do that, that will be the consequence; now you have the power to choose whether you want to progress towards your higher spiritual Self or your lower animalistic self” but leave the final choice to the individual. To that extent, great amount of respect is given to our discriminative power of thought and action.
Thanks, Priti, for sharing your thoughts. I agree with you that the scriptures tend to avoid a “forbidding tone”. It was probably not possible to outright forbid meat eating because people of the warrior class (kshatriyas) and the royal class were known to eat meat. In the Valmiki Ramayana, I believe, there is mention of Lord Rama eating meat as well as drinking wine. In the ancient texts on Ayurveda also eating meat and drinking alcohol are recommended in specific situations.
Hi Subhash, I don’t think its because Kshatriyas or kings ate meat and the scriptures had to pander to them. I believe it’s because the real essence of the scriptures (Vedanta mostly) is to truly give the choice to the individual. You have the power to choose your action, with the knowledge that you will therefore be responsible for the consequences of that action as well. So choose wisely (whether you want to eat meat or not).
As far as the Yoga Sutras is concerned, Sutra 2.31 does specifically say that the Yamas (including Ahimsa) are to be mahavrats and to be followed absolutely at all times. To that extent, Bryant is right? If Ahimsa has to be followed at all times (not limited by Jati, Desa, kala, Samaya), then being a vegetarian is an absolute requirement for an aspiring yogi, is it not?
I agree with your line of thinking. I just find it paradoxical that there is so much mention of animal sacrifice in the vedas. Also, despite being highly spiritual many people ate meat in the ancient times. As you mentioned, as yoga practitioners, if we follow the guidelines presented by Patanjali (sutra 2.31), we need to strictly follow the yamas as mahavratas.
I guess. The Yogic principles were prescribed for the people who were on the “path of knowledge”, finding the absolute Brahmn. So others were free to do whatever they wish. Unlike, ten commandments which has to be followed by all followers of that faith, Patanjali Yog Sutras were for select few. It is like when we do a Ph.D. in physics, we have to follow certain rules of study and ethics and experiments in the laboratory which are not expected from everyone. So I agree with both of you that these Yam and Niyams are only for the people taking the serious path of Yoga and rest of the people can follow the rules as per the nature of their work. Fortunately, we do not have a universal law in our land. There is a great deal of flexibility and it is left to individual to decide their own Karma, path….
i am sorry for the typo: The Yogic principles were prescribed for the people who were on the “path of knowledge”,. Subhash bhaiya. Please edit my comment if possible. 🙂
Hello Pankaj, thanks for sharing your thoughts. Yes, Yamas and Niyamas are for those serious about following the path of yoga.
I read in the Manusmriti: Drinking alcohol, eating meat and having sexual intercourse is natural to human beings, but great is the reward if one abstains from them.
It seems to me a good and sensible perspective.