A subtle web of strands
String Theory
Bhagavad-Gita chapter 14
continued…
BG
14.6-9
तत्र
सत्त्वं निर्मलत्वात् प्रकाशकम् अनामयम्
सुखसण्गेन
बद्नाति ज्ञानसण्गेन चानघ
tatra
sattvaṃ nirmalatvāt prakāśakam anāmayam
sukhasaṇgena
badnāti jñānasaṇgena cānagha
रजो रागात्मकं
विद्धि तृष्ण सण्ग समुध्बवम्
तद् निबध्नाति
कौन्तेय कर्म सण्गेन देहिनम्
rajo rāgātmakaṃ viddhitṛṣṇa saṇga samudhbavam
tad nibadhnāti kaunteyakarma saṇgena dehinam
तमस् त्व् अज्ञानजं विद्धि मोहनं सर्वदेहिनाम्
प्रमादालस्यनिद्राभीस् तन् निबद्नाति भारत
tamas tv ajñānajaṃ viddhi mohanaṃ
sarvadehinām
pramādālasyanidrābhīs tan
nibadnāti bhārata
In terms of translations, both S. Radhakrishnan and Bhaktivedanta Swami define sattva, rajas, and tamas as “goodness,” “passion,” and “ignorance.” It's easy to frame "goodness" and "ignorance" in terms of "Good and Evil." But it's not so black and white. Before jumping into "goodness" vs. "ignorance," with a bit of passion on the side, let's look at sattva, rajas and tamas from different points of view.
It is important to understand the modes of nature properly, since we are told that these qualities bind us to this world. The Vedic analysis of the impulses or modes that govern our sojourn in this material world do not parallel exactly the Manichean version of a battle between good and evil. Rather they are like the psychic DNA from which the universe evolves.
The DNA double helix |
It is
the tendency of Western readers who are under the influence of Christianity to
view Eastern philosophy through the lenses provided by the Catholic Church.
Since the Church divides everything into sin and piety, the Western tendency is
to jam the subtleties of Vedic through
into the same Procustean bed.
But it
is worth taking a closer look at the definitions of these terms. The problem
with defining sattva as goodness, is that goodness in English means
something very different from what is considered “sattvik” in the Vedic culture. In English we can speak of a “good” cigar, or a “good” steak. These things can hardly be called sattvika.
Kṛṣṇa says, “The quality of sattva is pure, (nirmala), it causes illumination and health.”
The
word Sattva
derives from sat, existence, or reality.
It refers to the aspect of material nature or prakṛti associated with
purity, virtue, cleanliness, wholesomeness, harmony. Kṛṣṇa here says that sattva-guna is nirmala,
spotless, uncontaminated, pure. The brahminical code which defines
particular food as sattvika follows Ayur-Vedic tradition; it is something
like the Judaic tradition of what is considered “kosher.”
While saints usually live their lives within the boundaries of what is sattvika, Kṛṣṇa here warns us not to think of sattva-guna as “liberating” in and of itself. A life of piety may condition us to happiness.
While saints usually live their lives within the boundaries of what is sattvika, Kṛṣṇa here warns us not to think of sattva-guna as “liberating” in and of itself. A life of piety may condition us to happiness.
In a
sense the world of birth and death “imprisons” the living entity. The goal of
life, then, should not be to make a comfortable situation within the “prison”
of this material world.
While a
saint may live within the parameters of sattva-guna,
following a so-called sattvik life
does not make one a saint. Kṛṣṇa
tells Arjuna, “sattva binds one to
this world through attachment to happiness and knowledge.”
Oddly the same piety
which brings happiness facilitates our attachment to the world of
exploitation. Sattva-guna is not a liberating quality. Living in piety in sattva-guna does not free one from ego. In fact, one may develop
the ego of believing oneself superior to others. One living in sattva-guna may become attached to sattvik living: an aesthetically
pleasing life with organic food, peaceful surroundings, noble discussions, and
a life of knowledge.
One who lives a sattvika life feels he knows more than others. He thinks himself better than others. He becomes conditioned to believe that he is more spiritually advanced. And yet this is rejected by Chaitanya Mahaprabhu who says, kiba vipra kiba nyāsī śudra kene noi… “whether one is a saint or scholar, a swami or a brahmana, or even a śudra, a lower caste, has nothing to do with self-realization. One who is deep in the science of Kṛṣṇa is fit to be guru.” C.C.M.L. 8.128
One who lives a sattvika life feels he knows more than others. He thinks himself better than others. He becomes conditioned to believe that he is more spiritually advanced. And yet this is rejected by Chaitanya Mahaprabhu who says, kiba vipra kiba nyāsī śudra kene noi… “whether one is a saint or scholar, a swami or a brahmana, or even a śudra, a lower caste, has nothing to do with self-realization. One who is deep in the science of Kṛṣṇa is fit to be guru.” C.C.M.L. 8.128
Another version of the three modes is "harmony, mobility, and inertia." In his purport, Bhaktivedanta Swami says, The living entities conditioned by material nature are of various types. One is happy, another is very active, and another is helpless. If we read harmonic for happy, mobile for active, and helpless for inertia we get a greater sense of these terms.
Rajas
For the same reasons that “goodness” while effective shorthand for sattva doesn’t really convey a true meaning, “passion” for rajas, is also ineffective. For within raja, we also find the concepts of “motion,” “energy,” and “preservation.”
Kṛṣṇa
explains that rajas has to do with rāga, attraction, craving, attraction.
It binds the soul by attachment to “action.” So while sattva binds the
intellectual to this world of exploitation through curiosity, intelligent
inquiry and fascination for satisfying questions, the impulse to action is the binding factor of rajas.
It is
important to mention that Kṛṣṇa is not advocating for “goodness” over “passion”
as being ethically or morally superior. He is simply giving a description of
the different psychological factors that bind us to the world of exploitation. Sattva refers more to intelligence, raja to mind, and tama to the purely physical.
It is not that “intelligence” is morally superior to “mind” or that “mind” is
morally superior to “body.”
These are three factors that must be considered in an analysis of our conditioned experience in this world. We shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that throughout his instructions to Arjuna, Kṛṣṇa keeps telling him that the best solution is dedication, devotion, bhakti, divine love.
These are three factors that must be considered in an analysis of our conditioned experience in this world. We shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that throughout his instructions to Arjuna, Kṛṣṇa keeps telling him that the best solution is dedication, devotion, bhakti, divine love.
Obviously
the desire for “self-preservation,” coupled with “attachment,” rāga, has another implication: sexual attachment or
what Freud calls libido.
You could think of Gandhi as being in the mode of goodness, and Tarzan in the mode of passion.
You could think of Gandhi as being in the mode of goodness, and Tarzan in the mode of passion.
If sattva implies living in harmony with
the universe, raja is the impulse not
only towards action but towards sex and reproduction. Bhaktivedanta Swami
comments, “The mode of passion is characterized by the attraction between man and
woman. Woman has attraction for man, and man has attraction for woman.” Here,
sex is not demonized as sin, but categorized as falling within the realm of raja-guna. Insofar as sexual impulse may
blind one to an understanding of the self as nonmaterial, it binds the embodied
soul fast to the illusory world of karma.
And by this rajarshic impulse to
action in the karmic world one continues to suffer reactions in
repeated birth and death.
Tamas
Tamas is “darkness,” “inertia,” or “ignorance.” The influence of tamas is seen in negligence, indolence,
sleep and delusion. It is important to remember here that the so-called “modes
of nature,” are not active in and of themselves.
The living entity falls under the sway of these modes according to its conditioning, but the modes of nature are not responsible for our actions. It is not accurate to believe that one is somehow forced to act by the influences of material nature. We alone are responsible for our actions.
But just as we sometimes associate with friends
who are “bad influences,” the gunas influence our psychology in subtle ways. It is
inaccurate to attribute a causal relationship between the modes of nature and
our particular karmic situation, and
yet by attachment to these “friends” the living entity gradually becomes
enslaved by mundane sentiments based on knowledge and happiness, sexual attachment and love, and even inertia
and inaction. Madness, psychosis,
intoxication, addiction, and dementia are some of the psychological aspects of tamas.
The living entity falls under the sway of these modes according to its conditioning, but the modes of nature are not responsible for our actions. It is not accurate to believe that one is somehow forced to act by the influences of material nature. We alone are responsible for our actions.
Any given life
is normally an unusual mixture of these three elements. While it is unusual to
find someone fully dedicated to intellectual pursuits and higher knowledge, it
is rarer still to find any individual who is absolutely free from the sexual
impulse, and impossible to find someone who never sleeps. As humans our lives
our colored by different levels of sattva,
rajas, and tamas. The idea is to find a guiding light that can
deliver us from these material influences. Kṛṣṇa tells Arjuna that this guiding
light will be found in bhakti, or
dedication, through which the baffling effect of the “modes of nature” may be
transcended.