Articles by alphabetic order
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
 Ā Ī Ñ Ś Ū Ö Ō
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0


The Doctrine of the Tattvas: the Human Condition

From Tibetan Buddhist Encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
968361.jpg



by Julius Evola



Aside from a general view of the manifestation, speculative Tantrism espouses the doctrine of tattvas, which it borrowed, for the most part, from the Sankhya and Vedanta systems. The term tattva has various meanings. In the present context, it may be translated as "principle" or "element." The abstruse doctrine of tattvas deals with the various articulations of the manifestation. I find it necessary to expound this teaching, since Tantrism explains our constitution and experiences in terms of it. The "doctrine of the elements" also plays a key role in practice (sadhana) and in yoga. On the one hand,

ontologically speaking, tattvas are the principles of nature. On the other hand, they are states, or forms, of experience. As far as their unfolding is concerned, I must repeat what has been said about the two great "eons" of the manifestation, namely, that a development in time should be ruled out, since

the temporal dimension appears and is established only at a later level of the tattvas' unfolding. The total process includes stages exempt from temporal limitations as well as stages in which time does not have its current meaning: When we speak of the order of development of the possibilities of manifestation, or of the order in which elements corre

sponding to the different phases of this development should be enumerated, great care must be taken to specify that such an order implies a purely logical succession, signifying, moreover, a real ontological connection, and that there cannot here be any sort of question of a temporal succession. In fact,

development in time corresponds only to a special condition of existence, one of those which define the domain in which the human state is contained; and there is an indefinite multitude of other modes of development equally possible, and equally included within the universal manifestation.1 A modern Tantric pandita, P. N. Mukyopadhaya, has compared the tattvas to the image of what appears as a consequence of shifting around various parts of a whole; they coexist in a hierarchy of constantly interchanging functions. It is worthwhile to emphasize again the relativity of the law of time, which

appears only at a given stage of the tattvas' development, mainly because this relativity allows us to solve various problems raised by practical philosophy. For instance, it renders obsolete the question of how a passage of the preexistent Absolute to the realm of finitude may have taken place,

since the Absolute does not exist in a spatio-temporal sense. Conversely, it is absurd to locate the Absolute at the end of a temporal sequence of various degrees in the process of realization. At the samsaric level in which it first appears, time is virtually indefinite, without end. Thus Buddhism may claim

that no ongoing organic process will ever lead to the end of the world (= liberation). Therefore, Buddhist "realism" is opposed to evolutionist fancies. The Absolute cannot be reached by following a "horizontal" path, but only by following an extratemporal "vertical" path and by escaping the temporal

condition characterized by the notions of "before" and "after." The Tantras of the Northern School (Kashmir) recognize thirtysix tattvas, which are divided in three groups: pure (shudda-tattva); pure and impure

(ashudda-shudda-tattva); and impure (ashudda-tattva). Impurity in this context refers to the degree to which something alien, or something of a different nature (idam), is found in the corresponding level of each group. According to this distinction, however, even shudda-tattvas are somehow impure, since only the supreme synthesis is, properly speaking, absolutely pure. This synthesis cannot be included in the series because it is the foundation and the substance of each tattva. It is called parasamvid, a supreme, omniscient power, and it needs to be considered aside from the real tattvas. This synthesis is also designated as a state in which Shakti "enjoys herself" (svarupavishranti) and as the I's self-knowledge.

This Shakti "is both immanent in and transcends the thirty-six tattvas and is by herself alone."2 From a cosmological point of view, the three groups of

tattvas can be compared to the "three worlds" of the Hindu tradition: the world without forms (arupa); the world of pure forms (rupa); and the material world. The worlds correspond to the essential, subtle, and crude states of the manifestation. The groups may also be related to the first three states of atman's existence, which I previously mentioned (in this case the fourth state, turiya should Be seen as parasamvid's complement). From the point of view of the productive shakti, in the Tantras, these groups match the sleep state, dream state,and waking state. Once shakti awakens, the process unfolds until

it produces the rnost distant form of "otherness," consisting in a dualistic opposition between the I and the not-I. At this point, on tologically speaking, the tattvas development comes to an end. The new series, which is exactly the same as the previous one (this time traveled in reverse), is

characterized by the lack of creative productions originating from the demiurgic shakti's desire, and also by states in which otherness and all forms of dualism are gradually overcome. In other words, they are states typical of yogic and of initiatory knowledge, usually encountered beyond the sensory perceptions of wakefulness. We must now consider the tattvas' unfolding until they reach the level of absolute duality. We will also explore the ascending phase leading to a perfectly developed human condition. Ordinary states of consciousness will be discussed in the following chapters of this book, dealing

with practice (sadhana). Practice is not concerned with metaphysical interpretations of reality, but rather with the tasks and the realizations that one can accomplish only by going "countercurrent" and by transforming oneself. 1. The first two tattvas beyond parasamvid are shiva and shakti, which are two

distinct principles, but at this level still inseparably connected, whence the symbolism of their sexual union. There is a Tantric saying according to which in every manifestation "there is no shiva without shakti, or shakti without shiva."3 This is not yet the absolute, transcendent unity of the two

(parasamvid) but rather the immanent and dynamic unity of the manifestation. At this level we find the principle of differentiation at work, whereby shiva and shakti are considered separately, as the first two tattvas. 2. After having been fertilized by the shiva principle, Shakti awakens. What ensues is no longer a state in which an immobile being, made of pure light, rests in itself, but rather a state in which


the spirit is the object of perception and enjoyment. At first, Shakti's awakening somehow implies a negation of being, in the sense of an endless sinking

into a self-accepting and self-concerned subjectivity. This is the primordial root of concupiscence, and the original cosmic "sensation" that determines

the negation alluded to by the Tantric principle "Shakti's function is one of negation." Ancient Greece knew the myth of Narcissus, which the neoplatonic tradition employed in its own version of the metaphysical interpretation of reality. The act of Narcissus staring at his own image may symbolize the

departing from the state of being, and the becoming lost in self-observation, self-perception, and self-love (the Sanskrit term nimesha, "closing the eyes," is given to Shakti in reference to her self-perception). This is the level of the third tattva, called sadakya or nada, which means "sound." Here

nada is defined both as the first movement produced an3 as the primordial motus that originated this dissociation. 3. Therefore, the being that has become the object of knowledge, of desire and, of observation, ceases to be aham ("I") and instead becomes idam ("this"), in a sort of cosmic fall. This marks the

rise of the original element of objectivity, or otherness, as a function of looking "upward." This process, in which Shakti opens her eyes, is referred to as unmesha. The corresponding tattva is called bindu-tattva and ishvara-tattva. On the religious plane, Ishvara, as I previously remarked, corresponds to

the God of theism presiding over the manifested world. One may properly speak of ishvaratattva if by the term "other" (idam) one refers to the collective possibilities of the manifestation that are encompassed in a larger unity: hence the other term, bindu, which literally means "dot." It is a nondimensional

dot, encompassing plurality in itself, though in a transcendental way. (Parabindu means the "supreme source.") One text says that at the level of this tattva we find a "condensation" (ghanibhuta) of power.4 Here the powers of the manifestation form a unity, which is the image of the I's (aham) substance

in the form of idam, "thisness." Therefore, one could draw a parallel with the chemical notion of precipitation. At this level, the "other" is still totally compenetrated by aham, the I, and is subsumed in the transcendent "dot," that is, the dwelling point of Ishvara, who is the Lord of the Manifestation.

4. Duality as such is found in the following level (Sadvidya), since it constitutes a development of the previous state. Object and subject now face each other and are, so to speak, in full equilibrium (samanadhikarana). Hence the title of "pure knowledge" (shuddha vidya) is sometimes given to this tattva, referring to this transparency, which is still connected to a generic dual principle. The saying "All this [the

universe] is nothing but my manifestation" refers to the Ishvaric consciousness, in which the principle of differentiation does not succeed in abolishing identity. This marks the end of the pure tattvas' series. Next I would like to consider the semipure tattvas, which include maya-shakti and the five kankukas. 5. Because of maya-shakti, differentiation prevails over identity, and the content of experience becomes autonomous. The transparency of universal "pure knowledge," as well as bindu (the transcendental dot that includes all the possibilities of the manifestation), is now broken down into the three relatively distinct aspects of knower, known, and knowledge. Bindu, through the dyad (maya), becomes a triad, the so-called triple point, tribindu. This is the general scheme or archetype of every finite experience. At this level a split occurs, as in the case of a person standing between two mirrors,

whose every movement would be reproduced in two distinct yet perfectly identical images. On the one hand, we have the spiritual series under the aegis of the Shaivist principle. On the other hand, we have the real or material series under the aegis of the Shaktic principle. Here it is necessary to mention

the gunas. We previously learned that in the Sankhya system the gunas are the three powers constituting prakriti and operating in Shakti's productions. In Tantric metaphysics, which does not consider prakriti a self-subsistent principle, the gunas assume a different meaning. They correspond to various

modalities of shakti, which come into play once the ongoing process has led one beyond the metaphysical "point," that is, beyond ishvara-tattva. The three gunas are called sattva, rajas, and tamas. Sattva comes from the word sat, which means "being." The term designates the elements reflecting the stable and

luminous nature of being, and it is usually associated with Shiva's nature. Tamas, on the contrary, denotes what is fixed in the opposite sense of a stiffening, or of an automatism (e.g., passive staticity, sheer passivity, the force of inertia, weight, mass, a limiting and obscuring power). Tamas

presides over every depleted process and over inactive potentialities. Rajas, conversely, symbolizes dynamism, becoming, transformation, change, and expansion; it corresponds to what we usually designate as energy, life, or activity. Rajas may also be influenced by the other two principles. On the one hand,' when it is influenced by sattva, rajas appears in the guise of an


ascending and ever-expanding force, in virtue of which a given form or being becomes and develops. On the other hand, when it is influenced by tamas, rajas appears as the force acting in the processes of alteration, fall, and dissolution. The variety of the world's beings and forms derives from the dynamic and constant interaction of the three gunas, which are constantly undergoing transformation and-change. Therefore, in several Hindu doctrines the gunas are

adopted as reference points not only by the science of nature (the final result being a qualitative physics similar to that promoted by Aristotle) but also by classifications according to types and characters. Differences among beings are caused by the various ways in which the three gunas relate. Because of

the three gunas' interaction the purushic principle appears in the manifested world under various forms. The state described by the Sankhya system in which there is no longer any becoming, since the gunas are in perfect equilibrium, corresponds to the last of the pure tattvas of Tantric metaphysics. This

tattva is found at the level in which the entire manifestation is essentially and transparently subsumed in a great source point, the so-called parabindu. The source point, or bindu, corresponds to the loss of the gunas' equilibrium, which according to Sankhya originates the development of the world. At the

end of the tattvas of this second group, or when maya's splitting function takes effect, itjs possible to begin to recognize two parallel manifestations of the gunas in both the spiritual and the material planes of reality. In other words, the gunas play an active role as qualifying powers both in the mental

sphere and in the natural world of matter. 6. If tribindu and the various appearances of this triad in the order of the manifestation represent the development of what is contained synthetically, essentially, and transparently in the bindutattva, then likewise, the kankukas represent the deployment and

the making explicit of what is contained in maya-shakti. As we have previously learned, the arising of the experience of idam, or of the other, is caused by maya-shakti. We also considered that otherness entails finitude, as well as the existence of particular forms, since it exists merely as a part of the

whole. Therefore, at this level, what was once the object of a unitary, atemporal, and simultaneous experience now breaks down into a multiplicity, a heterogeneity, and a sequence. The kankukas are those transcendental powers presiding over this limited process. Kankuka literally means "sheath" or "covering," in reference to the power that veils and hides being. Kankukas also refer to the principles of individuation and determi


nation. They incorporate that particular measuring function, typical of maya, which is responsible for "carving out" and for isolating distinct forms from a spiritually homogeneous reality. The first kankuka is time (kala), understood as the universal form of the elements found in a sequence. Atman, or the

purushic/ Shaivist principle, will never fully identify with particular and finite forms proper to a given state of existence. Therefore, atman is led from one experience to another. It eventually creates a surrogate for that totality, which it no longer encompasses at the same time. Atman creates this

surrogate in time, or in the course of an endless fragmentation of the finite. Therefore, every state appears to be insufficient, or in need of something else through which its development may be brought to an end. This constitutes the manifestation of the second kankuka, called raga (literally, "passion" or

"attachment"). Once the fullness or wholeness proper to bindutattva falls short, the finite consciousness is existentially attracted toward different objects, thus originating a temporal succession and the process of becoming. This consciousness is caught in a web of dependencies, which for the most part

derive from causality and irreversibility, especially if we consider that every point in time is conditioned by two factors: the previous one, from which it proceeds, and the following one, toward which it orients itself, out of an unconscious yearning for the Absolute. The more this system of interdependent

conditionings unfolds, the more complex it becomes. One may refer here to the opinion according to which action (karma) generates ignorance (avidya), which in turn generates more karma, and so on.5 The point being made is that the state in which being or the other or the very same I, are not "known" generates

in turn desire and actions conditioned by desire. Actions performed under the influence of desire tend to confirm this illusory duality, however, and increasingly tie the I to something apparently other than itself. As a result, the I becomes increasingly needy and restless, as it moves further along the

temporal series and the process of becoming, all the while experiencing recurring delusions and new needs. This reminds us of a man who is running in the futile attempt to catch his own shadow. The third kankuka is niyati, which corresponds to a limitation of autonomy. This limitation in turn is caused by

the system of relations deriving from raga. The fourth kankuka is kala (not to be confused with the first one, kala), through which the finite condition eventually affects power. Collected and full energy (sarvakaritrita) is now transformed into a determinate power, which is defined by a


specific existential condition and by a specific body. This takes place on an epistemological level. The omniscient being assumes the form of a "finite knower." Moreover, while at Ishvara's level knowledge is characterized by an objective transparency, at this level it is influenced by various emotive

responses, by habitual tendencies (samskaras), by what is related to desire, by an elan vital, and by a given existential condition. The power that acts in this fashion is called vidya-kankuka.6 At this point, maya-shakti's function has been completely fulfilled. Every possible experience is conditioned by

such things as peculiarity, multiplicity (in the spatial dimension), time, causality, impulses, and actions deriving from a state of existential deprivation. The difference is that at the level of the semipure tattvas, all of the above limitations have not yet de facto materialized; they are rather

considered to be generic, potential conditions for the various forms of finite existence that find their fulfillment only at the level of the impure tattvas. In the Tantras even impure tattvas are approximately the same as those expounded by Sankhya and by Vedanta. The first of these tattvas is buddhi, the principle of every individuation, which is free from every particular form of conditioned existence. At this level individual consciousness appears as a samsaric reflection of a higher consciousness. That is why Sankhya considered buddhi to be the intersection of purushic and prakritic elements.7 The

function of this tattva consists in acting as an intermediate principle between the individual and the superindividual dimensions. Since buddhi is, in itself, on a higher plane than individuation, a continuity between forms and individual states can therefore be established. This continuity, however,

cannot be seen from the perspective of those who identify with these states and who are being swept away by the current. The fact that this continuity cannot be seen may even refer, at a certain level, to various manifestations of the I assuming the form of unrelated lives. Let us not forget that the

belief in a sequence of existences is the cardinal tenet of the popular theory of reincarnation. With regard to the individual consciousness, which is limited to only one life, buddhi is also called mahat, the "great principle." On the level of individual psychology, every decision, deliberation, and

determination is determined by it. Buddhi even acts in those volitional and decisive aspects of the inner life. Ahamkara, or asmita-tattva, comes right after buddhi. We have already encountered this term before; as in several other instances, it receives different meanings according to the reference points and


planes of existence being adopted. The word ahamkara specifically refers to that particular form of "I-ness" which, as in the case of individual consciousness, is characterized by the intake of data of a given experience, both internally and externally. On the one hand, through ahamkara an

experience is considered to be "my own" and subjectivized. On the other hand, the I assumes certain determinations to be its own, thus coming to a conclusion that may be thus expressed: "I am this being who is variously determined."8 This led Patanjali's to consider ahamkara and avidya as synonymous, since atman in its essence cannot be localized, being a power over and beyond forms. As in the case of ahamkara, buddhi's determination is concretized and expressed in a given state of existence, which is still conditioned by the ties represented by the notions "ego" and mine. The process of individuation is

furthermore developed mainly through the third semipure tattva, which is manas, and then (continues to develop) through the five tanmatras. Manas, which has the same root as the Latin word mens, can somehow be equated with the mind, not as a psychological reality, but rather as an organ and a "power." Thus

we may say that manas is the power at work in perceptions, in an individual's reactions, and in the production of images (fantasy, imagination). It differs in two aspects from the modern understanding of mind and thought. First, manas is other than atman. Mind and thought are not to be confused with the

spiritual principle. Manas is conceived as an organ, or as an instrument. According to Sankhya, prakriti (nature), and not purusha, constitutes manas's substance. (This is a far cry from the modern Western glorification and exaltation of thought. Westerners would probably consider the yogic practice of

neutralizing or of "killing" the manas to be inconceivable, absurd, and even abhorrent). In turn, manas is the root and the fundamental principle of the senses, and it corresponds more or less to the medieval European philosophical notion of the sensorium commune. According to a view expressed in the

Bhrihad-Aranyaka-Upanishad, it is through the manas that one is able to see, to hear, to taste, and so on. The senses are manas's articulations, as well as the atman's organs. Manas makes sensory knowledge possible, inasmuch as it is connected to the various powers of sensible reality. These powers are the so-

called tanmatras, more on which later. As a result of maya-shakti's splitting function, they are perceived by the individual as representations or subjective impressions ("names") and as the external reality ("forms").9 The congruency and correspondence


between the two series, which is the fundamental problem giving rise to epistemology, is guaranteed by an essential and preordained unity existing in the manas, albeit at a superindividual and preconscious level. Second, manas's function, as I said, is not simply psychological. Manas is a power associated

with ahamkara and therefore with a certain degree of individuality. This power carves out elements from the totality of the experience by promoting an awareness of some of its areas and sections to the exclusion of others, which are hidden, in that particular being, in the subconscious or in the

unconscious. Cosmic experience then becomes, to a large extent, the unconscious or subconscious dimension of the single living being.10 Practically speaking, manas's selective action occurs in the context of an experience characterized by the five paramanus and tanmatras. In order to understand these tattvas, we need to reject the widely accepted notions regarding the process of perceptual and sensory knowledge, according to which perceptions are occasioned by real material objects. The Hindu view diverges from philosophical realism by upholding that there are no such things as matter (in the Western sense of the word) and objective physical realities. A reference is made, instead, to superphysical principles, which come before and are superior to mere subjective sensory perceptions and to what is commonly regarded as physical reality. These principles are known as tanmatras, a word related to the

idea of measure (matra), and which refers to a qualifying, determining power. This determination is applied to sensible qualities, hence reference is made to the tanmatras of sound, touch, form, color, taste, and smell. In the objective order of things, namely, in nature, the tanmatras are manifested in the

five mahabhutas ("the great elements"), which are ether, air, fire, water, and earth: hence the transverse correspondence of ether to sound, of air to tangible matter, of fire to form and colored matter, and of earth to smell. The word matter, in this context, is only meant analogously, since matter in

the modern sense of the word is unknown to the aforesaid theory, according to which the only real substratum is Shakti, whatever form it may take. The intent is to emphasize that sensory impressions have a definite, real substratum corresponding to their nature, and do not have a mere psychological relevance.

Since the mahabhutas belong to the causal plane, they should not be confused with natural elements or with states of physical matter. The tanmatras, to which they should be reduced, must rather be conceived as "simplifying elements," that is, as principles at


work in those elements that correspond to both shakti's various manifestations and to supersensory forms of experience. The physical elements are mere manifestations and appearances on a particular plane of the tanmatras and of the five great elements. This plane corresponds ontologically to the fifth element, earth, which is conceived as a phase of extreme condensation, that is, as a phase of shakti's complete objectivication and externalization.

Therefore, the element earth is the principle of everything that appears to the senses in physical and material forms during the waking stage of an

individual conscience. Ether, air, fire, and water, which are experienced in the ordinary human contact with nature, are not really the elements carrying such names, but are rather their symbolic and analogical manifestations in the world. The supernatural "great elements" can be experienced. The possibility

of a supernatural, extrasensorial perception and of related powers arises only when the manas, in the context of yogic practice, withdraws from the organs of the senses. For instance, coming to know water means to leave behind its sensory perception and to ascend to a level that is hierarchically superior to

the one encountered in the world. As I shall point out, in the doctrine of subtle or occult corporeity this corresponds to the svadhishthana-chakra, which is one of the "centers" coming immediately after earth. In regard to the subsequent organization of a finite existence, one must consider the geminate

series of the ten indriyas, composed of five cognitive senses (jnanen-indriyas) and of five conative senses (karmenin-indriyas). Indriyas means "pertaining to Indra." These are powers or faculties related to organs through which the manas, in association with ahamkara, carves out, as I have said, the form and

destiny of a given individual existence. The five cognitive indriyas are related to the ears, skin (as the general organ of touch), eyes, tongue, and nose. These occur in a progressive order, from hearing (which corresponds to ether) to the sense of smell (which corresponds to earth). The conative indriyas are

related to the organs responsible for excretion, reproduction, grasping (hands), locomotion, and expression (voice, words, etc.). They are divided into two groups of five: five mahabhutas and five tanmatras. According to the standard organic-qualitative Hindu worldview, this system is kept together by

relationships of correspondence, which are particularly important in the elaboration of a science of subtle reactions, of evocations, and of awakenings. We may well remember that the unfolding always works from


the inside out, and that the outer, by virtue of leaning on the inner, is conditioned by it. Thus the objects of knowledge depend, metaphysically speaking, on the organs of knowledge. These in turn depend on the "inner organ" (buddhi + ahamkara + manas). The inner organ depends on the spiritual principle, according to the simile "Just as the rim of a chariot wheel is fixed on the spokes, and the spokes are fixed on the hub, even so, these elements of being

are fixed on the elements of intelligence, and the elements of intelligence are fixed on the breathing spirit [[[prana]]]."11 The prana in this text is identified with the "intelligential self" (prajnatman). On the empirical plane of separated existences, this identification does not prevent the subject of

knowledge from being the "elemental I" (bhuta-atman), that is, the I who is found in the diversified interplay of the gunas and who is, in different degrees of passivity, carried away by its own experiences.12 According to the Tantras, this is the whole series of the thirtysix tattvas. Once Shakti

arrives at prithivi ("earth"), she stops and becomes fixed. Shakti now stands on the threshold of her own manifestation and, at the same time, identifies with the "other," losing herself in it. The action of manifestation, at this point, is worn out. Shakti becomes kundalini, "wrapped up." She is represented

asleep at the center of occult corporeity, which corresponds to earth (prithivi-chakra). She is portrayed as a serpent wound into three coils around the symbolic phallus of Shiva, who is the motionless lord presiding over the manifestation. The three coils symbolize the three gunas. The rest of the serpent

represents the forms and the determinations (vikritis) which develop through maya and through the other tattvas. Shakti's infinite potential, which unfolded in the process of manifestation, becomes gathered and lost in itself, in that particular center (chakra) corresponding to the earth. According to

the Tantric perspective, the gunas are responsible for the differentiation of various aspects of nature. In the inorganic world, power is essentially under the sign of tamas. Thus it enjoys a minimal degree of freedom, which eventually is lost in the course of an automatic and mechanical process. Matter in

this case represents the objectification of the furthest limit reached by ignorance and, therefore, by the power's passivity as such. In the organic world, tamas's action becomes feebler. In it, "life" already represents a partially liberated Shaktic form, which becomes increasingly free as it ascends along

the organic evolutionary ladder. Therefore, the various forms of existence in this world may be considered as the objectification and as the symbol of higher degrees of intelli


gence (vidya). In other words, life is seen as a fire that consumes ignorance. In a living organism, the "other" is gathered to a certain degree into some kind of unity and is perfused by a certain light. Shakti, essentially under the sign of rajas, characterizes outward movement, elan, and dynamism.

Eventually, once life is gathered and connected with higher forms of consciousness (e.g., with humankind), then sattva's influence, whose essence is being and pure light, becomes manifested. Humans are Shakti under the double form of conscious, active power (corresponding to what is usually called "spirit")

and of unconscious, passive power (corresponding to organic life and the body). The individual's unconscious corresponds to the macrocosm. Through the tamasic form, a finite being experiences the macrocosm and the collective powers hidden in reality. The idea that cosmic forces are locked in the

unconscious and in the vital organic elements became the cornerstone of Tantric hatha yoga. These forces constitute each person's occult corporeity. Generally speaking, Tantric and Hindu teachings use the term body (kaya) in a broader sense, in reference to those fundamental elements that are presupposed by every individual existence, even though they usually go undetected. Such is the case with a hand, which even though it may be the only

visible part of a body, still presupposes an organism as a whole. In reference to these "bodies" the Tantras follow Sankhya's lead by distinguishing a triple body, comprising the following parts:


1. A "causal" body (karana-sharira), which follows the higher tattvas.


2. A "subtle body" (sukshma-sharira), which in turn has two aspects. T

he first aspect is a creation of the mind (the so-called mindbody, manomaya, or vijnanamaya) in which buddhi, manas, and the five great elements have free play (these are also the immaterial principles that are prior and superior to the various powers of sensory perceptions, which they still condition). The

second aspect is a "vital" one (the so-called body of life or of breath, pranamaya) that is the substratum of every organic and physiological reality, of various forces, and of vital functions. The mind-body takes up this vital body in the course of samsaric manifestations.13


3. A "material" or "dense" body (sthula-karira), which is the empirical body, the soma. This body consists of the coming together of the specifications of the five elements (bhuta), and it represents


the grossest and most exterior form of the manifestation of a human entity. The material body is sustained by the subtle body, which in turn is sustained by the causal body.


It is relevant at this point to add some other remarks concerning the second body (the subtle body) considered in its vital aspect, because of the important similarities it shares with yoga. This body is an entity that, in respect to the material body, plays the same function that Aristotle attributed to the "entelechy." This notion has lately been picked up by some modern biological theories with a vitalistic orientation. Entelechy is, so to speak, the "life's life," an immaterial and simple reality that unifies the body by penetrating and animating it. It is also at the origin of the body's special form

or constitution, of particular relationships, and of the harmony of its various functions. The difference between the Aristotelian entelechy and modern vitalism, on the one hand, and Hindu teachings, on the other hand, is that in the latter, entelechy is not reduced to a mere explicative principle. Prana,

the universal life force, which according to traditional teaching constitutes the subtle body, can also be experienced during the subtle state coinciding with the awakening of one's body. It is said that during this state prana appears luminous and radiant (tejas). It is written in an Upanishad: "Life is the

breathing spirit [[[prana]]]. The breathing spirit, verily, is life."14 Even though it is not endowed with breath, as in some crude interpretations of these teachings, prana is connected with the vital "breath" whose five modes of existence are outlined in the hyperphysical Hindu physiology: prana, apana,

vyana, samana, and udana. These are the five vayus, a word that can be translated as "currents," since it derives from the root va, "to move," and designates the movement of the air masses and of the winds. The doctrine of vayus is abstruse for two reasons. First, they are the elements of a

supernatural (yogic) experimental science. Second, the texts are not always in agreement as to which of the various definitions of the vayus is the correct one. According to the prevalent view, the first vayu, which carries the same name of prana (the universal life force), has a solar character, and it

exercises a compelling and attractive influence on the cosmic milieu engulfing it. This prana assimilates everything that comes out of the cosmic prana. When it is compared to breathing, it represents the inhaling phase. Apana, which has a terrestrial character, is interpreted by the texts in various ways. It mainly corresponds to the vital energy at


work in excretory and ejecting functions (particularly in the emission of semen, in the domain of sexuality). Vyana, the "pervading breath," permeates the body, holds it together, and even presides over the metabolism and organic processes such as digestion and blood circulation. Udana has an opposite

function to the first vayu, namely, of exhalation instead of inhalation. Udana's unfolding into the cosmic milieu is associated with the functions of speech and pronunciation. It refers to the exhaling of one's last breath at the time of death. It also refers to the ascending current in the sushumnanadi

("most gracious channel") of those who leave behind the human condition in order to experience the active yogic death. In hatha yoga, prana and apana are considered to be antithetical, since the former is oriented upward and the latter downward. Vyana attempts to keep these opposites in equilibrium.15

Because of its dynamic and lively character, the pranic body enjoys a special relationship with Shakti, since she is, contrary to Shiva, the active principle behind movement and life. The Western Hermetic-alchemical symbolism alludes to this reality when it talks about the "philosophers' woman" or the

"occult woman." The subtle body is usually thought to be the seat of samskara, or vasana. The tattvas doctrine, which accounts for the general condition of individual consciences living in certain forms of existence, still does not explain the empirical existence of a given individual conscience, or jiva. We

have seen how manas-tattva carves out, circumscribes, and organizes a specific experience. Why is this experience being determined instead of another? Why does a certain world, rather than another, come to be known by a jiva? This world must correspond to what the living individual being affirms or desires in

its deep, transcendental will to become (which has been shown to be related to the buddhi-tattva); hence the broader meaning of samskara. The various samskaras correspond to an inner, transcendental prefiguration toward which the discriminating and individuating activity of manas is oriented. In a

narrower context, they are subconscious potentialities encountered in the course of life. Some of them have an organic character, others have a psychological character. As one can see, they involve the form and physical makeup of a given body, as well as the temperament, character, and habitual tendencies of a given individual. We are what we are, even though each of us lives in his or her own world, because a specific group of samskaras is present in each of us rather than a different one. We may encounter this notion even in Western philosophy (Kant, Schopenhauer), where it is spo


ken of as "intelligible or mnemonic character." The Hindu idea has wider implications, however, since it extends to the biological and subtle domains, as well as to anything that determines the existential situation of a given individual. What then is then the origin of the samskara(s)? This is a complex

question, and it can be answered only by referring to the doctrine of "multiple legacies." Among many popular beliefs of Hinduism, we find an explanation based on the idea of reincarnation, which should be accepted with due caution. It is claimed that samskaras, which are the elements constituting a finite

being endowed with body, mind, habitual tendencies, and experience, are the effects and the consequence of previous existences, which are in turn determined by karma. This does not really solve the problem but merely recasts it in different terms. If in order to explain the samskaras that are at work

in the present existence we have to go back to activities exercised in a previous life, the problem merely compounds. In order to explain why those activities took place, we would have to go back, even further, to a previous life, and then to the one before that, and so on, ad infinitum. It is my

contention that eventually the series must stop and be explained in terms of an original act of selfdetermination. What is this act all about? That is an open question. The answer cannot be located in time and in space, since, in these categories, there is no continuity between the various manifestations of

a single conscience, or between the multiple existences, as the reincarnation myth upholds. Continuity is to be found only in the subtle, vital (pranic) plane, and in the power of life, which is neither dependent on a single body nor exhausted in it. In a higher degree, it exists in the level of buddhi-

tattva, the "individuating individual," whose nature consists in shaping reality. One must think that at the highest level of the impure tattvas, an inference takes place in the following terms: pure self-determination, which is a "slice" of higher planes, proceeds from the sphere of pure tattvas and

from the causal body, which then translates itself into the act of buddhi.


There is no explanation for this determination, since it takes place in a domain where the supreme reason for acting resides with act itself, where causes

are not determined by other causes, and where forms are manifested as stages of what has been called Shakti's "play," Vila. In these higher planes of existence (prajina) there are no antecedent causes and not even samskaras. Samskaras are eventually picked up at a later stage, as a result of the election,


coalescence, and appropriation following the merging with the samsaric current. This current includes predetermined forms and various legacies (whether biological or pranic), which refer to previous elements, whether connected or not. In this sense, samskaras actually exist in the subtle body in which the

causal body is manifested. They are also responsible for imparting direction both to manas's selective action, through its organs, and to the life that supports, nourishes, and shapes the physical form. Somehow the ancient notions of "demon" and "genie" may be reduced to the body of life informed by a

special group of samskaras, which, through buddhi, brings to life the samsaric image of the unmovable Shiva. Therefore, samskaras should not be confused with the real, deeper nucleus of one's personality, which from the level of buddhi on is found outside the conditions for which previous existences took

place. This contributes to demythologizing the popular belief in reincarnation, which is not part of esoteric teachings, regardless of what some may think.16 So far I have expounded the Tantras' worldview and anthropology. Even though metaphysical speculation plays an important role in these texts, they

should not be viewed as philosophical textbooks. The theory found in the Tantras has been developed in view of practical applications, and it plays a major

role in sadhanashastra. The theory constitutes the background and the foundation of a system in which action plays a key role. Thus it is said: "All the knowledge acquired by a brilliant mind is useless if one does not obtain the power conferred by sadhana."17 In the next chapters I will expound the rituals and the techniques of Tantric yoga.




Source