The body in early Hatha Yoga
by Ruth Westoby | 2024 | 112,229 words
This page relates ‘Amritasiddhi: unite Bindu and Rajas inside� of study dealing with the body in Hatha Yoga Sanskrit texts.—This essay highlights how these texts describe physical practices for achieving liberation and bodily sovereignty with limited metaphysical understanding. Three bodily models are focused on: the ascetic model of ‘baking� in Yoga, conception and embryology, and Kundalini’s affective processes.
Go directly to: Footnotes.
ṛt: unite Bindu and Rajas inside
I start with the ṛt as, although it does not describe a practice of DZīܻ, it articulates in detail concepts that underlie ṻ yoga in subsequent texts. The ṛt is significant for ṻ yoga in setting out the bindu-rajas model of the body. The ṛt arises in a male celibate context and the redactors understand rajas and bindu occurring within the body of the male practitioner. The վ첹ٲṇḍ too sites rajas within the male practitioner (վ첹ٲṇḍ 54) (Mallinson 2018:199). The siting of rajas within the male practitioner, the absence of references to female practitioners and the supposed absence of women providing rajas as ritual media create a tension in the essential physiological understanding of rajas as menstrual and sexual fluid arising in women. The occurrence of rajas in men is not explicitly attested in ܰ岹.[1] How does the ṛt consider rajas to occur in men? ṛt 7.8 describes rajas as ‘produced in women� (ٰīܻ). Are the redactors disingenuous about the involvement of women, masking their involvement as the source of rajas? Or is the reference to ‘arising in women� merely a conventional definition of rajas that does not exclude it arising in men?
The ṛt asserts a conventional mode of procreation which it inverts as a yogic mode of inverse procreation or what I have termed �spiritual embryology�: from the external union of bindu and rajas people are created and when they are united (yoga) internally one is a yogi (ṛt 7.9). What I refer to as the ‘depletion model� is the gravitational and embryological paradigm laid out in the ṛt’s seventh chapter on semen (bindu). This chapter asserts that seed (īᲹ) is the single fundamental essence of the body, and creates a micro-macrocosmic homology with the world: everything seen in the world has its origin in this seed (ṛt 7.1). Verses one to seven describe bindu. The next five verses describe rajas.
The term īᲹ or ‘seed� is often used as cognate with bindu and is defined in terms of bodily matter, sanctity and divinity: it is the essence of bodily constituents, always auspicious and contains the gods in subtle form (ṛt 7.2). Bindu is synonymous with moon, seed, rapture (mada), the fundamental element, the vital principle and the essence of everything (ṛt 7.3). Bindu is the source of sexual affect as all the bodily blisses arise from it (ṛt 7.4). In the next verse bindu always gives everything (ṛt 7.5). The technique for mastering bindu is breath as bindu enters the same state (ٳ—but not essence) that breath is in (ṛt 7.6). Utilising alchemical terminology in relation to the four stages of mercury, bindu can be thickened and remove disease, bound to make one a sky-rover (khecara), dissolved or absorbed (īԲ not laya) to bring about all powers, and stilled to attain liberation (ṛt 7.7). The divine nature of bindu is emphasised later in the chapter where it is said to be synonymous with Buddha, Ś, վṣṇ, ʰ貹پ and all the gods (ṛt 7.15), and the god who is the lord of all elements resides in all beings in the form of bindu (ṛt 7.18).
Bindu is thus multifaceted and extends across epistemic domains: ontological, physiological, divine, power-substance and essence, and is described in terms of mercurial alchemical procedures. The ṛt describes rajas much more succinctly. If bindu is multivalent rajas defies clear definition. Bindu is defined by the category of gender as twofold: īᲹ is the male bindu and rajas is produced in women (ٰīܻ) (ṛt 7.8). Despite the text specifying that īᲹ is the male form of bindu it later uses the term bindu to refer to just the male aspect (ṛt 7.10).[2] For the celibate male context of the ṛt how is rajas to be understood as female-gendered but nonetheless arising in men? It could be understood as not gender-specific such as the use of the term yoni when used as a bodily orientation in descriptions of posture. As discussed later in this chapter in such instances yoni refers to the non-gendered perineal region of practitioners, as used by Birch (2018b:168), rather than the womb or uterus of women.
Bindu is in the head and moves downwards in the body due to felt pleasure. Despite the deployment of esoteric yogic body physiological locations, it is fairly clear that 峾ū貹 and ūṇa, the locations of bindu, are in the head[3] (ṛt 7.10ab). In the initial stages of the technique there is a key reference to sexual arousal for it is as a result of ‘pleasurable contact� (ܻś貹ś) with ūṇa that bindu goes by way of the central channel (ṛt 7.10cd). Chapter three, the inquiry into the moon, identifies the moon in the head and two types of white nectar raining down from it. One of these nourishes the whole body and the other goes by way of the middle of the goddess of the centre (ⲹ) to bring about creation (ṛt 3.1�4). Here the falling down of bindu is associated with sexual pleasure: it resembles a cluster of white jasmine flowers and when congealed as a result of rapture goes by way of the middle of the central channel (ⲹ madhya), i.e. descends, to cause procreation (ṛt 3.4).[4]
Rajas is located in the lower body in the great sacred field in the middle of the yoni and is red as a Ჹ flower (ṛt 7.11ab). Rajas is associated with divinity as is bindu, and specifically the goddess: rajas rests upon the goddess element (ṛt 7.11cd). ṇḍī does not appear in the ṛt yet the īٲٳٱ is somewhat parallel as a divine feminine element located at the base of the body. However, the īٲٳٱ does not unite with ś at the top as ṇḍī does in some sources. In the ṛt the īٲٳٱ integrates a divine, śٲ element with rajas as a biological substance. I will discuss the consistency of the ṛt’s body with ṇḍī in chapter five.
In accordance with the locations of bindu in the head and rajas at the base are the associations of bindu with the moon and rajas with the sun (ṛt 7.12ab). They are to be united in the very hard to reach ūṭāg (ṛt 7.12cd) in the head. The text, in closing this section defining rajas, accords the union of bindu and rajas great status as the fundamental element, the ultimate teaching, the best yoga, the path that bestows liberation and the ultimate secret (ṛt 7.13). Of course, the text also accords such status to the other elements that make up the body in chapters one to ten.
The text uses a metaphor of non-generation to describe abandoning bindu yoga: such a person is a fool who keeps vigil without fruit among barren trees (ṛt 7.14).[5] The generative metaphor, that bindu yoga is productive of results, contrasts with the intention of bindu yoga not to produce progeny.
Bindu is mastered in the same way that breath is mastered (ṛt 7.6). The state of mind is the same as the state of bindu (ṛt 7.16). A causal relation is asserted between breath, bindu and mind: when the breath moves bindu moves and one whose bindu moves has a moving mind (ṛt 7.17), a principle re-stated two verses later (ṛt 7.19). The repetition likely underscores the import of the principle rather than poor redaction. The movement of bindu, mind (citta) and breath () is given as the reason for birth and death (ṛt 7.20), thus connecting this triumvirate with the depletion paradigm—downward flow and external union of bindu and rajas leading to procreation (ṛt 7.9). An alternative triumvirate is then offered to the one just established: internal resonance (岹), bindu and mind (citta) (ṛt 7.21). Mallinson and Szántó note that breath would make better sense than 岹 in relation to the preceding verses but all the witnesses report 岹 (2021 121:153). In the ṛtmūla the practitioner is instructed to raise bindu and 岹. References to 岹 occur in the ٲٳٰⲹDzśٰ and Ჹṻī辱 in the context of a female practitioner of DZī: the Dzī’s 岹 becomes bindu (ٲٳٰⲹDzśٰ 174cd, Ჹṻī辱 3.98). Therefore, the occurrence of the term 岹 in the ṛt is not without subsequent attestation in similar contexts. The question remains as to the ontological relationship between the triumvirate of bindu, 岹 and citta: though the three become one they are not simply synonyms for one another. The text specifies that although these three are present individually in the body the breath masters them all (ṛt 7.22).
The ṛt gives much explanation for why breath is the correct practice but little on technique. Simply, breath is stilled, literally killed (mriyate) through contact with the inside of the goddess of the centre (ⲹ). This stills bindu and mind (ṛt 7.23). The terminology of killing recurs in the next verse where the elements that reside in the body are dependent on breath and hence stilled or killed (mriyante) when breath is killed (ṇa) (ṛt 7.24). As discussed in chapter five ṇḍī is killed in the central channel in the Amaraugha.
Finally, the ṛt chapter concludes with a pair of verses that powerfully recapitulate the spiritual inversion paradigm: death results from the fall of bindu, life from holding onto bindu (ṛt 7.25ab). Bindu is described as a great jewel that when perfected leads to all powers (ṛt 7.25cd). The text restates this principle in similar terms with the body described as diamond: when the moonlike nectar of immortality (ṛt) goes down all embodied beings die yet he whose bindu is indivisible is a Siddha in a diamond body (貹ñᲹ) (ṛt 7.26). This concludes the discussion devoted to bindu in chapter seven. The ṛt extols different aspects of the body and practice as the pinnacle, or multiple apexes. Though here bindu is the ultimate principle and practice, the other chapters easily substitute peak features. The concept of rajas as rasa (taste, element of the body) occurs in chapter 14 on practice (the import of that chapter I discussed in relation to the process of baking the body). For now, suffice that through practice the practitioner can use the ‘yoga of time� (Dz) to still or kill (ṇa) (presumably) the breath, ‘unite� (melaka) the two rasas and make breath enter the goddess of the centre (ṛt 14.14). Mallinson and Szántó note that the two rasas are the male and female bindus (Mallinson and Szántó 2021:135n196). Finally, in chapter 24, ‘the inquiry into the perfection of the body�, bodily perfection occurs when the impurities are mastered and the two bindus united (ṛt 24.1).
Sexual affect is clearly associated with bindu in ṛt chapter 21 concerning the bliss that is death by time. After the breath has burst through the bolt of ⲹ a fire arises that destroys the fire of time (ṛt 21.2). The bliss of the falling of the drops of bindu is death by time (Բ) in the body and the fall of bindu causes old age and death in embodied beings (ṛt 21.3). This seems to mean that the destruction of the bliss of the falling bindu is replaced with the bliss of the fire of time. Chapter 22 summarises the arising of innate bliss (ԲԻ岹) when the expulsive breath which goes out of the body in conjunction with bindu, i.e. ejaculation, is controlled (ṛt 22.1-2). I return to a discussion of bliss and sexual affect in chapter five.
Having considered the material on rajas and bindu in the ṛt I now turn to the վ첹ٲṇḍ.
Footnotes and references:
[1]:
Chinese traditional medical literature accords a ‘sea of blood� in men and women (Valussi 2008:78). In female alchemy the ‘sea of blood� is the infant’s palace in women and located three and a half inches below the navel; it is not to be confused with the lower elixir field, where male practice begins (Valussi 2022:452).
[2]:
I tend to use the term bindu to refer to the male aspect but this sometimes includes the female.
[3]:
See Mallinson and Szántó (2021:119-120n144).
[4]:
There is a correspondence here with Chinese materials that describe a downward flow of jing energy in the body associated with sexual arousal, as noted in the next chapter.