be absolute—which means to say, there should be no proviso or conditional clause.
There is no limitation of these principles either by circumstances, or by time factors,
or by the location of one’s existence. That is the meaning of these principles being
absolute.
Jāti deśa kāla samaya anavacchinnāḥ sārvabhaumāḥ mahāvratam (II.31). The disciplines
of yoga are called mahavrata, the great vows, and not ordinary vows or small vows
that can be broken under certain conditions. And they are sarvabhaumah, which
means to say they are universally applicable, under every condition and to every
student of yoga—there is no exception at all. Such a rigid prescription is made for the
purpose of protecting oneself from possible encounters of forces which are
undesirable, as I mentioned.
These principles are not to be conditioned by place. For example, there are people
who do violence and harm of various types to animals and other subhuman beings,
but they put a condition upon it, saying, “We will do it only in such and such a place,”
or “We will not do it in such and such a place.” “In holy places, I will not eat meat; in
other places I can eat,” is the meaning. Or, “I may catch fish—not in Rishikesh, but in
some other place.” So, this is a condition of ‘place’, where the prohibited act is
permitted at certain locations, though it is not allowed in some other places. It is not
to be conditioned like that, says the sutra. It is not that we can do harm at one place,
though we may not do it at another place. It should not be done at any place. That is
the sarvabhaumah, or the universally applicable form of this vow.
It should not be conditioned by species. For example, “I will kill only fish. I will not
kill any other animal.” That is conditioned by species, and it also is not allowed. The
harmlessness that one has to extend to creatures has to apply to everything—whether
it is an ant, a fly, a moth or a fish, it makes no difference. It should not be
conditioned by place, and it should not be conditioned by species. That is the
meaning of the terms ‘jati’ and ‘desa’. It should also not be conditioned by time. “On
holy days I will not do it, but other days I will.” That also is not allowed. It should not
be conditioned by a time factor; it has to be applied at all times. Samaya is occasion:
“Under certain conditions and circumstances I will do it, but not always.” That also is
not allowed.
Therefore, this principle, this vow of yama and niyama, is unconditioned by species,
by space, place, time and occasion or circumstance. But, it is such a terrible thing to
practise it. The author knows very well that the opposites of these feelings are likely
to take hold of a person one day or the other, and sometimes in such a strong way
that it will be difficult to face them. For that, the simple recipe provided for is that
one should contemplate, as far as possible, daily, unremittingly, the opposites of
these possibilities of the violation of these virtues. That is called the pratipaksa
bhavana method—what is called the substitution method in psychoanalysis. Instead
of pursuing an entirely wrong path, we pursue a slightly innocuous path. Though it is
not far removed from it, yet it is not as harmful as the earlier one.
Vitarkabādhane pratipakṣabhāvanam (II.33) is the sutra mentioning this pratipaksa
bhavana method. When there is an inclination to violate these principles due to the
common weakness of human nature, one should contemplate the feeling of the
opposite. Common sense tells us that one cannot contemplate the opposite at the
moment one is possessed by the instinct. That is not possible. This is a kind of