Part 5 (2/2)

Guna Underlies All Actions The guna are three (tri-guna): tamas, rajas and sattva. The tendency towards inertia comes from tamas guna, the tendency towards activity from rajas guna and the tendency towards balance from sattva guna. The three guna cannot exist without the other. They are like three phases of a wave: tamas being the movement downwards towards the nadir, rajas being the movement upwards towards the crest and sattva being the balance, the point at which there is a pause.

Tri-guna as Parts of a Wave In the elements, tamas guna dominates, which is why they have a tendency towards inertia, unless acted upon by an external force (first law of thermodynamics). In plants and animals, rajas guna dominates, which is why they grow and run to overcome hunger and fear in order to survive. In humans, the sattva guna dominates, which is why only humans are able to trust and care for strangers, empathize and exchange. But it does not mean that all humans are sattvik. While humans have a strong sattvik component compared to animals, plants and minerals, amongst humans there is a differential distribution of all three guna.

Arjuna, when sattva s.h.i.+nes through all body gates, there is happiness and understanding; when rajas s.h.i.+nes through, there is greed, restlessness and l.u.s.t; when tamas s.h.i.+nes through, there is confusion and indolence. At the time of death, if sattva dominates, rebirth takes place in happy and knowledgeable realms; if rajas dominates, rebirth takes place in action-filled realms; if tamas dominates, rebirth takes place in lost, decaying realms. From sattva comes knowledge, from rajas desire and from tamas ignorance.-Bhagavad Gita: Chapter 14, verses 11 to 17 (paraphrased).

Guna impact not just matter but also the mind. Thus, thought and emotions also display the three tendencies. Therefore some people are lazy followers, some are driven leaders who want to change the world and some decide when to follow and when to lead, and know that the world can be changed only cosmetically with technology, but not in essence, at a psychological level. Tamas guna stops us from thinking, so we follow the trend. Rajas guna stops us from trusting anyone but ourselves. Sattva guna makes us care for those who are frightened, intimidated by the diverse and dynamic reality of the world.

Different guna dominate at different times. Tamas guna is dominant in a child who follows the adult parent. Rajas guna is dominant in a doubting, fiercely independent, energetic youth who strives to make his own path. Sattva guna is dominant in the mature, who understand when to be silent and when to speak, when to follow and when to lead.

The guna can be seen literally or metaphorically. They explain the diversity of nature, the diversity of ecosystems, plants, animals and humans, the diversity displayed by each living creature in various stages of his or her life. When we react unconsciously or involuntarily, unaware or unable to control our impulses, we are being governed by our guna. Guna results in karma and karma creates guna. This creates the fluid material world: the complex canvas of our existence.

Arjuna, there is none born on earth or in heaven who is free of the influence of the three tendencies. -Bhagavad Gita: Chapter 18, Verse 40 (paraphrased).

Chapter 17 informs us how the three guna can express themselves as external activities: faith (shraddha), food (ahara), exchange (yagna), austerity (tapasya) and charity (daan). In tamas, the tendency is to be lazy and confused, and so there is mimicry of the other. In rajas, the tendency is to achieve, dominate and impress, and so there is initiative and aggression towards the other. In sattva, the tendency is to understand and be happy, and so there is gentleness and affection for the other.

Arjuna, everyone's faith is in line with their nature. They are what they believe. The satvik wors.h.i.+p those who give on getting; the rajasik wors.h.i.+p h.o.a.rders and grabbers; the tamasik wors.h.i.+p ghosts. Wors.h.i.+p need not be based on scriptures, and can involve harrowing penance and torture for self-aggrandizement, hypocrisy and pa.s.sion. Different is the food we like. Different is also the reason for exchanging, being austere or charitable.-Bhagavad Gita: Chapter 17, verses 4 to 7 (paraphrased).

Chapter 18 takes things further and cla.s.sifies even internal aspects of our being, from knowledge to activity to personality to intelligence to willpower to happiness, to the three guna. Each time, tamas involves backward movement and no thought, rajas involves forward movement with self-absorbed thought and sattva involves appropriate movement, forward or backward, taking even the other into consideration.

Arjuna, the tamasik gives up action fooled by others; the rajasik gives up action in fear; the sattvik never gives up action, only the fruits of action, doing not just the nice, shunning not the nasty.-Bhagavad Gita: Chapter 18, verses 7 to 10 (paraphrased).

Tri-guna Within and Without In Chapter 18, Krishna attributes human apt.i.tude and talent (varna) to the guna.

Arjuna, it is these tendencies that create the four apt.i.tudes: scholars.h.i.+p, leaders.h.i.+p, entrepreneurs.h.i.+p and servitude.-Bhagavad Gita: Chapter 18, verses 41 to 44 (paraphrased).

Our talents come from our guna. This does not mean that every talent can be mapped to a particular guna. It does not mean that scholars.h.i.+p comes from sattva guna, or leaders.h.i.+p and entrepreneurs.h.i.+p come from rajas guna or servitude comes from sattva guna. It means that the three guna, in different proportions, manifest as scholars.h.i.+p, leaders.h.i.+p, entrepreneurs.h.i.+p and servitude. We will find scholars who are rajasik, sattvik or tamasik; leaders who are rajasik, sattvik or tamasik; entrepreneurs who are rajasik, sattvik or tamasik; servants who are rajasik, sattvik or tamasik.

Mapping Varna to Guna From around 2,000 years ago, we find in Indian society a discomfort with fluidity and a great desire to fix things with rules. Genetic studies have shown us that India's infamous caste system, which began as professional guilds, became increasingly rigid from this time onwards. This was the time when the Manu Smriti and other such books, that reduced dharma to a set of rules (niti) and traditions (riti), came to be written. Rules were aimed to create predictability and so greater value was placed on gender and lineage, than talent. Communities (jati) started following a particular profession that maintained their fidelity by insisting that the sons follow the father's trade and daughters not marry outside the community. The Manu Smriti mapped these jatis to the varnas: thus it was a.s.sumed that children of priests would be scholars, children of kings would be leaders, children of traders would be entrepreneurs and children of servants would be servile. Further, these varnas were mapped to guna: Brahmin jati was mapped to sattva guna, Kshatriya jati and Vaishya jati to rajas guna and Shudra jati to tamas guna.

The Manu Smriti, and other such law books, are more political and prejudiced than accurate, for every community has members of all three guna. And in every community there will be those who think, those who get things done, those who calculate and those who follow. The Manu Smriti reveals the human attempt to control the world and make nature predictable by forcing people to follow the vocation of their fathers. It is all about trying to fix a fluid world, a futile effort according to The Gita.

The Mahabharata, for example, speaks of Karna, whose talent as archer overrides the social demand that he follow his father's vocation and stay a charioteer. No matter how hard we try to fix things, nature will break all boundaries and rules. Varna will always overshadow jati. Duryodhana appreciates Karna's talent while Draupadi, the Pandavas, Bhisma and Drona reject and mock Karna. Duryodhana sees in him an opportunity and the rest see him as a threat. n.o.body is a yogi. They are either attracted (raga) or repelled (dvesha) by him. No one sees Karna for himself, beyond his varna and jati, that he cannot stop himself from pursuing his pa.s.sion for archery, logical arguments notwithstanding, for such is the power of one's guna.

Mapping Jati to Guna Likewise, marriage rules are designed to regulate the desires of humanity. But guna will force us to challenge these rules. Thus in Ramayana, though married, Parashurama's mother Renuka desires Kartaviryarjuna, Gautama's wife Ahalya desires Indra and Ravana's sister Surpanakha desires Ram. Renuka is beheaded, Ahalya turned to stone and Surpanakha's nose is cut off. None of these brutal actions stops nature from changing its course. Guna will continuously make people take decisions that even their mind opposes.

A judge tends to see sattva guna as superior and tamas guna as inferior, but the observer knows that sattva guna is the most desirable simply because it is least threatening while tamas guna is least desirable because it is burdensome. Rajas guna is glamorous and seductive, for it is a.s.sociated with ambition and determination and is seen as far more proactive, compared to the reactive sattva guna.

The observer also distinguishes the sattvika from the yogi-the sattvika's tranquillity is effortless and inborn, while the yogi's tranquillity is the outcome of learning and effort. The yogi pays attention to the other, which distinguishes him from the sattvika.

'Arjuna, the wise observer does not hate what is there and seek what is not there amidst light or activity or delusion. He knows that it is the tendencies of matter at work, and so is always indifferent to the s.h.i.+fts around, always at peace, amidst pleasure and pain, gold or clay, when loved or unloved, when treated as friend or foe, in honour or disgrace, if praised or blamed.'-Bhagavad Gita: Chapter 14, verses 22 to 25 (paraphrased).

Views on Tri-guna Krishna points to rajas guna for all desires (kama) and anger (krodha); tamas guna for all laziness and confusion; sattva guna for a balanced, responsible view. The moment we say that the agent is the guna, we don't take credit or blame, nor do we give credit or blame. In other words, we don't judge. We are able to connect with atma. The moment we judge, attribute agency to others or ourselves, for fortune or misfortune, we disconnect from atma and give rise to aham. In aham, we don't accept the power of guna and blame people for our problems. We then seek leaders if we are tamasika, followers if we are rajasika or simply disconnect if we are sattvika.

Arjuna, the lord resides in everyone's hearts, deluding them with a sense of control while making them go round and round like cogs in a wheel.-Bhagavad Gita: Chapter 18, Verse 61 (paraphrased).

A yogi accepts that the stubbornness of Ravana in the Ramayana, Kansa in the Bhagavata Purana and Duryodhana in the Mahabharata are the results of their guna, which is beyond their control. As bhakta, he attributes their behaviour to the games (leela) of G.o.d. This makes it easier to make even the undesirable part of a yagna, rather than simply exclude them.

Response of Different People to Villains

We are all a masala box of guna, with one guna dominating at different times. We can all be lazy, a.s.sertive, detached or engaged. Yoga makes us aware of the guna at work.

You and I value property Guna may determine our body and our personality. Karma may determine the circ.u.mstances of our life. But humans have the power to create their own ident.i.ty by creating and claiming property, or kshetra. Society values people more as proprietors, than as residents of the body, for property is visible and measurable. As a result, 'mine' becomes more important than 'me'. The gaze s.h.i.+fts from the inside to the outside. Krishna speaks of kshetra before he speaks of the tri-guna, in Chapter 13 of The Gita, but in My Gita kshetra is discussed after guna, as it flows better into the following chapters by introducing us to the social body, the artificial expansion of the body, found only in human society.

To stay alive, animals need to know the ident.i.ty of the other: whether the animal around them is a predator (can it eat me?) or prey (can I eat it?); mate (can we produce offspring?) or rival (can it grab my food or mate?). They need to locate the other, and thus themselves, precisely in the food chain and pecking order.

Humans do not have to bother about food chains and pecking order. But we wonder who we are, and about our relations.h.i.+p with those around us. What is our purpose? How are we valued?

Purpose A thing in nature has value only if it can be consumed as food. The sun, the rain and the earth did not have any value until trees came along and sought sunlight, water and soil as food. Likewise, plants had no value until animals sought them as food. Animals had no value until other animals sought them as food. Who seeks humans as food? Can humans be of value without being consumed?

Value Chain = Food Chain Speculation along these lines led to the composition of the Rig Vedic hymn of humanity (purusha sukta), which speaks of the consumption of man, and the Yajur Vedic ritual of dismemberment of the human-animal (purusha-medha). Both hymn and ritual were composed a thousand years before the composition of The Gita. Both can be taken literally or metaphorically. The literal approach a.s.sociates them with human sacrifice: this idea appealed to the nineteenth-century European Orientalist notion of exotic India, of the 'n.o.ble savage'. The metaphorical approach draws attention to the human ability to give meaning to each other, and nourish each other emotionally and intellectually. In the Upanishads, it is common to equate food (anna) with meaning and ident.i.ty (atma): food is what all living creatures seek; meaning is what only humans seek. The same idea is visualized in Chapter 11 of The Gita, when Arjuna notices Krishna's universal form consuming humans.

Krishna, I can see the warriors of their side and ours rus.h.i.+ng into your mouth, being crushed between your teeth, entering your blazing mouth like rivers running into the ocean. Entire worlds hurry to your mouth to be destroyed, like moths to flame. You devour all the worlds with your many fiery mouths.-Bhagavad Gita: Chapter 11, verses 26 to 30 (paraphrased).

This vision taken literally can be terrifying, as Krishna appears as a predator, even a villain. But when the blindfold of judgement is removed, Arjuna understands the metaphor: by consuming the Pandavas and Kauravas, Krishna is giving them value. He is declaring that they nourish him, thus extending the logic. Arjuna realizes that he exists as 'food' for those around him. He brings value to his brothers, to his cousins, to the world at large. They are also 'food' for him. They nourish him, give him value and purpose. This consumption is both material and psychological. Withdrawal from the battle would mean denying the others meaning.

Man as Food But while Krishna eats, he is not really hungry. He declares that he is immortal, and so does not fear death, and does not need food. He declares he is infinite, and so he cannot be separated from the other-he is both the eater and the eaten. He eats, not because he is hungry, but to make the other feel valued. And he allows himself to be eaten to nourish the other. In other words, he is a yogi who does not seek meaning from outside; he gets his ident.i.ty from within, from the atma.

'Arjuna, I am the ritual, I am the exchange, the offering, the herb, the chant, the b.u.t.ter, the fire, all that is offered.'-Bhagavad Gita: Chapter 4, Verse 24 (paraphrased).

Meaning From Within and Outside Before the start of the Kuru-kshetra war, the Pandavas and the Kauravas once came to Krishna for help. Krishna offered them all that he had: one could have Narayani, his fully equipped army, and the other could have Narayana, his own unarmed self. The Kauravas chose Narayani while Pandavas chose Krishna. Narayani is Krishna's resources, all that he has. Narayana is all that he is. The former is tangible and measurable, and even outlasts death, hence preferred by the Kauravas over the latter.

The Kauravas mimic the behaviour of the asuras in the Puranas who prefer Brahma's boons to Brahma. The Kauravas and the asuras seek material nourishment, not emotional or intellectual nourishment. They seek 'his' not 'him'.

During a yagna, Narayani is exchanged: 'mine' becomes 'yours'. If this is done with consideration of the hungers and fears of the devata, then the yajamana has a relations.h.i.+p with the devata. If, the yajamana, is only focussed on his hungers and fears, then it is simply a transaction with the devata where more value is given to 'what you have' rather than 'who you are'.

Relations.h.i.+ps and Transactions Economists value the Narayani called wealth. Educationists value the Narayani called literacy. Politicians value the Narayani called power. Feminists value the Narayani called gender. Employers value the Narayani called skill. Physicians and surgeons value the Narayani called the body. Society is not interested in Narayana-what a person is: his hungers, his fears, or his potential. Things matter more than thoughts. Property becomes a subst.i.tute for feelings. Hence the purpose of life has become all about acquiring more and more Narayani. In The Gita, the concept of Narayani is presented in Chapter 13 as kshetra.

Kshetra literally means a farm, a manmade s.p.a.ce created by domesticating nature. In nature, there are no farms. Humans turn forest into farms to produce food. They mark out the boundaries, uproot the trees, clear the land, till the soil, sow the seeds, permit growth of crops and get rid of weeds. The farmer protects the farm and the produce fiercely. Born of his effort, he claims owners.h.i.+p of the farm: 'It is mine'. Other humans acknowledge it: 'It is yours.' Thus, the farm becomes his property. The property nourishes him, physically and psychologically. Physically it gives him food. Psychologically it gives him an ident.i.ty of a farmer. He feels ent.i.tled. The property also grants him immortality, since he can bequeath it to his family, who are also his own.

Field versus Farm In nature, there is no property. There is territory that animals fight over to ensure they have enough food supply. Territories cannot be inherited; they go to the strongest. Properties, however, can be inherited. The son gets the estate, the t.i.tle and all the accompanying wealth, power and status from the father.

In the Ramayana, during the forest exile, when Lakshmana draws a line (rekha) around Sita's hut, he very publicly defines what is Ram's kshetra. Within the Lakshmana-rekha, Sita is Ram's wife; outside she is just a woman for the taking. Kshetra thus is an artificial construction, not a natural phenomenon.

Me and Mine In Chapter 2, Krishna speaks of deha and dehi, the body and resident of the body. In Chapter 13, he speaks of kshetra and kshetragna, the property and proprietor. Another word used for kshetragna is kshetri. The resident transforms into the proprietor as the body expands to include t.i.tles and estate.

<script>