The term Yoga in its technical sense first occurs in the Taittiriya Upanishad and the Katha Upanishad, although references to Yoga occur in much earlier Upanishads. In the Upanishads, knowledge brings deliverance from death. The man in perfect possession of himself is compared to a skillful driver, who is able to master his senses-it is such a man who gains liberation.

Know thou the soul as riding in a chariot,

The body as the chariot.

Know thou the intellect as the chariot driver,

and the mind as the reins.

The senses they say are the horses;

The objects of sense, what they range over.

He who has understanding,

Whose mind is constantly held firm-

His senses are under control,

Like the good horses of a chariot driver.

He who has understanding,

Who is mindful and ever pure,

reaches the goal

From which he is born no more.

from the Katha Upanishad

Although Yoga is not named, the image is specifically yogic: the harness, the reins, the driver and the horses are all related to ‘yuj’ to harness or yoke.

The Mahabharata began as a heroic epic and was probably completed between the seventh and sixth century BC. The first two centuries saw a large number of additional texts added to this epic, some in the form of complete books. One of the first portions added was the Bhagavad Gita, probably in the first century BC.. Although it was added, it contains traditions dating to much earlier times. Thus the quote above sets a theme taken up again in the Bhagavad Gita.

The Message of the Bhagavad Gita

The Bhagavad Gita, one of the first substantial interpolations into Book VI of the Mahabharata, gives Yoga a place of the highest importance. Naturally, the Yoga that Krishna expounds and recommends in this masterpiece of Indian spirituality is not the classic Yoga of Patanjali nor an arsenal of “magical” techniques, but a Yoga adapted to the Vishnuist religious experience – a method whose end is to gain the unio mystica. If we consider the fact that the Bhagavad Gita represents not only the highest point of all Indian spirituality but also a very broad attempt at a synthesis, in which all the “paths” of salvation are validated and incorporated into Vishnuist devotion, the important place that the Krishna of the Gita accords to Yoga represents a real triumph for the yogic tradition. The strong theistic colouring that Krishna gives it greatly assists us toward understanding the function performed by Yoga throughout Indian spirituality. Two conclusions follow from this observation: (1) Yoga can be understood as a mystical discipline whose goal is the union of the human and divine souls; (2) it is under this aspect – i.e., as “mystical experience” – that Yoga was understood and applied in the great popular “sectarian” trends, which are echoed in the Mahabharata interpolations. Broadly speaking, Krishna reveals to Arjuna the “imperishable Yoga” (yogam avyayam). His revelations concern: (1) the structure of the universe; (2) the modalities of Being; (3) the ways leading to final liberation. But he is careful to add (IV, 3) that this “ancient yoga” (puratanah yogah), which is the “highest mystery”, is not an innovation; he had already taught it to Vivasvat, who revealed it to Manu, who transmitted it to Ikshvaku (IV, 1). “Coming thus by steps, it became known to royal sages. But that devotion was lost to the world by long (lapse of) time” (IV, 2). Whenever order (dharma) languishes, Krishna manifests himself (IV, 7) – that is, he reveals this timeless wisdom in a way appropriate to the respective “historical moment”. According to the Indian tradition, so steadfastly reaffirmed by Krishna, the various “historical moments” – which are at the same time moments of the cosmos becoming – do not create doctrines, but only produce appropriate formulas for the timeless message. This amounts to saying that, in the case of the Bhagavad Gita, its “innovations” are explained by the historical moment, which demanded precisely such a new and broader spiritual synthesis. In regard to the point that is of interest to us here – the meaning that the poem confers on yogic techniques – we have only to recall that the fundamental problem of the Bhagavad Gita is to determine whether action too can lead to salvation, or if mystical meditation is the only means of attaining it – in other words, the conflict between “action” (karma) and “contemplation” (shama). Krishna attempts to solve the dilemma (which had obsessed Indian spirituality from the beginnings of the post-Vedic period) by showing that the two methods, previously opposed, are equally valid, it being possible for each individual to choose the method – be it action or be it knowledge and mystical contemplation – that his present karmic situation permits him to practice. It is here that Krishna turns to “Yoga” – a Yoga that was not yet Patanjali’s darshana, but that was equally far from being the “magical” Yoga referred to in other passages in the Mahabharata.

Krishna’s Example

It could be said that the essence of the doctrine revealed by Krishna is contained in the formula: “Understand Me and imitate Me!” For everything that he reveals regarding his own Being and his “behaviour” in the cosmos and in history is to serve as model and example for Arjuna; the latter discovers the meaning of his historical life, and at the same time gains liberation, by understanding what Krishna is and what he does. Whatever a great man does, that other men also do. And people follow whatever he receives as authority” (III, 21). And he addes, referring to himself: “There is nothing … for me to do in (all) the three worlds … Still I do engage in action” (III, 23). And he hastens to reveals the profound meaning of this activity: “For should I at any time not engage without sloth in action, men would follow in my path from all sides …If I did not perform actions, these worlds would be destroyed, I should be the cause of universal confusion and of the end of created beings” (III, 23-24).

Hence Arjuna must imitate Krishna’s behaviour – that is, in the first place, he must continue to act, lest his passivity should contribute to “universal destruction”. But, in order to act “as Krishma acts”, Arjuna must understand both the divinity’s essence and his modes of manifestation. This is why Krishna reveals himself – knowing God, man also knows the model that he must imitate. Krishna begins by revealing that both Being and nonbeing reside in him and that the whole of creation – from the gods to minerals – descends from him, (VII, 4-6; IX, 4-5; etc.). He is continually creating the world by the power of his prakriti (IX, 8), but this perpetual activity does not fetter him (IX, 9); he is only the spectator of his own creation (IX, 10). Now, it is just this apparently paradoxial evaluation of activity (of karma) that constitutes the essential lesson of the Yoga that Krishna reveals; by imitating God, who creates and sustains the world without participating in it, man will learn to do likewise. “A man does not attain freedom from action merely by not engaging in action; nor does he attain perfection by mere renuncation,” for “nobody ever remains even for an instant without performing some action” (III, 4-5). It is in vain that man restrains the activity of his senses; he who “continues to think in his mind about objects of sense” – that is, the generality of mankind – does not succeed in detaching himself from the world. Even if he abstains from action in the strict sense of the word, all his unconscious activity, provoked by the gunas (III, 5), continues to fetter him to the world and keep him in the karmic circuit.

Condemned to action – for “action is better than inaction” – man must accomplish the acts prescribed for him – in other words, his “duties”, the acts that are incumbent on him because of his particular situation. “One’s own duty [svadharma], though defective, is better than another’s duty [paradharma] well performed” (III, 35). These specific activities are conditioned by the gunas (XVII, 8ff; XVIII, 23ff.). Krishna more than once repeats that the gunas proceed from him but no not fetter him: “I am not in them, but they are in me” (VII, 21)). “The four-caste system was created by Me with disticntion of strands [gunas]; although I am the door of this, know Me as one that eternally does no act” (IV, 13). The lesson that man must learn from all this is: while accepting the “historical situation” created by the gunas (and he must accept it, because the gunas too derive from Krishna), and acting in accordance with the necessities of that “situation”, man must refuse to valourize his acts and thus accord his particular condition an absolute value. In other words, on the one hand he must deny ontological reality to any human “situation” (for only Krishna is saturated with Being); on the other, he must not allow himself to enjoy the “fruits of his acts.”

“Acts” and “Sacrifices”

In this sense, it may be said that the Bhagavad Gita attempts to “save” all human acts, to “justifiy” all profane activity; for, by the very fact that he no longer enjoys their “fruits”, man transforms his acts into sacrifices – that is, into transpersonal dynamisms contributing to the maintenance of the cosmic order. Now, as Krishna reminds Arjuna, only acts whose object is sacrifce do not fetter: “Therefore act, casting off all attachment” (III, 9). Prajapati created sacrifice in order that the cosmos should be manifested and men should live and propagate (III, 10ff.). But Krishna reveals that man, too, can collaborate in the perpetuation of the divine work – not only by sacrifices, properly speaking (those which compose the Vedic cult), but by all his acts, of whatever nature. For him who engages in sacrifice, “all acts are destroyed” (IV, 23). This is to be understood as meaning that his activity no longer “fetters,” creates no new karmic ties. It is in this sense that the various ascetics and yogins “sacrifice” their physiological and psychic activities: they detach themselves from these activities, give them a transpersonal value; and, doing so, “all of [them], conversant with the sacrifice, have their sins destroyed by the sacrifice” (IV, 25-30).

This transmutation of profane activites into rituals is made possible by Yoga. Krishna reveals to Arjuna that the “man of action” can save himself – in other words, can escape the consequences of his participation in the life of the world – while still continuing to act. The “man of action” here means the man who cannot retire from secular life in order to accomplish his salvation through knowledge or mystical devotion, The only rule that he must follow is this: he must detach himself from his acts and their results – in other words, “renounce the fruits of his acts”, act impersonally, without passion, without desire, as if he were acting by proxy, in another’s stead. If he follows this rule strictly, his acts will no longer sow new karmic potentialities, will no longer keep him in subjection to the karmic circuit. “Forsaking all attachment to the fruit of action, always contented, dependent on none, he does nothing at all, though he engages in action” (IV, 20).

The great originality of the Bhagavad Gita lies in its insistence upon this “Yoga of action,” which is realized by “renouncing the fruit of one’s acts” (phalatrishnavairagya). This is also the reason for its unparalleled success in India. For henceforth every man may hope to be saved, by virtue of phalatrishnavairagya, even when, for all kinds of reasons, he must continue to participate in social life, to have a family, worries, to work, even commit “immoral” acts (like Arjuna, who must kill his enemies in war”). To act calmly, automatically, without being troubled by the “desire for the fruit”, is to obtain a self-mastery and a serenity that probably only Yoga can bestow. As Krishna teaches: while acting without restriction, one remains faithful to Yoga. This interpretation of Yoga technique, which presents it as an instrument permitting man to detach himself from the world while yet continuing to live and act in it, is characteristic of the magnificent synthetic effort of the author of the Bhagavad Gita, which sought to reconcle all vocations (ascetic, mystical, active) as it had reconciled Vedantic monism with Samkhya pluralism. But at the same time, the fact that it could be so interpreted testifies to the extreme suppleness of Yoga – which thus once again proves that it can adapt itself to all religious experiences and satisfy all needs.

Yoga Technique in the Bhagavad Gita

In addition to this Yoga within the reach of everyone, which consists in renouncing the “fruit of one’s acts”, the Bhagavad Gita also briefly expounds a yogic technique in the strict sense, for the use of munis (VI, 11ff.). Although morphologically (bodily postures, gazing at the tip of the nose, etc.) this technique resembles the one described by Patanjali, the meditation of which Krishna speaks is different from that of the Yoga-sutras. In the first place, pranayama is not mentioned in this context. Secondly, yogic meditation in the Gita does not achieve its supreme end unless the yogin concentrates on Krishna.

“With soul serene and fearless, constant in his vow to keep the way of chastity [brahmacari], his mind firm and steadfastly thinking of Me, he must practise Yoga, taking Me for the supreme end. Thus, with his sould continually devoted to meditation and his mind under control, the yogin obtains the peace that dwells in Me and whose final boundary is nirvana” (VI, 14-15). The mystical devotion (bhakti) of which Krishna is the object gives him an infinitely greater role than that which Ishvara played in the Yogasutras. In the Gita, Krishna is the only goal; it is he who justifies yogic meditation and practice, it is upon him that the yogin “concentrates”, it is through his grace (and in the Gita the concept of grace already begins to take form, foreshowing the luxuriant development that it will undergo in Vishnuist literature) that the yogin obtains the nirvana that is neither the nirvana of late Buddhism nor the samadhi of the Yoga-sutras, but a state of perfect mystical union between the soul and its God.

A true yogin (vigatakalmashah, “freed from the corruption” of good and evil easily attains the infinite bliss (atyantam sugkham) produced by contact with Brahman (brahmasamsparsham). This invoking of Brahman (VI, 28) in a text that is a vindication of of Krishna need not surprise us. In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna is pure Spirit; the “great Brahman” is only the “womb” (yoni) for him (XIV, 3). “I am the father, the giver of the seed” (XIV, 4). Krishna is the “foundation of Brahman,” as he is of immortality, of the imperishable, of eternal order and perfect happiness (XIV, 27). But although in this context Brahman is put in the “feminine” condition of prakriti, his nature is spiritual. The muni attains him through Yoga (V, 6). The “infinite bliss” that results from union with Brahman allows the yogin to see “the soul [atman] in all beings and all beings in the atman” (VI, 29). And, in the following strophe, it is precisely the identification of the atman of beings with Krishna that provides the foundation for the mystical bond between the yogin and the God: “To him who sees me in everything and everything in me, I am never lost, and he is not lost to me. The devotee who worships me abiding in all beings, holding that all is one, lives in me, however he may be living” (VI, 30-31). We find the same motif as that of the verse just cited (VI, 30) in the Isha Upanishad (VI), which proves that the Upanishads contained theistic trends that they passed on to the Gita, where they flowered so magnificently. Krishna, the personal god and source of true mystical experiences (bhakti), is here identified with the Brahman of he purely speculative metaphysics of the earliest Upanishads.

Nevertheless, the Gita reserves its highest praise not for the yogin completely detatched from the pain and illusions of this world, but for him who regards another’s pain and joy as his own (VI, 32). This is a leitmotiv of Indian mysticism, and particularly of Buddhist mysticism. The author of the Bhagavad Gita bestows all his sympathy on him who practises this kind of Yoga. If he fails in this life, he will be reborn in a family of talented yogins, and, in another life, will succeed in accomplishing what he could not achieve in this (VI, 41). Krishna reveals to Arjuna that the mere fact of having attempted the way of Yoga raises the yogin above the man who has confined himself to practising the rites prescribed by the Vedas (VI, 44). Finally, Krishna does not fail to say that, among the ways to salvation, the best and most commendable is the way of Yoga: “Yoga is higher than asceticim [tapas], higher even than knowledge [jnana], higher than sacrifice” (VI, 46).

The triumph of yogic practices is here complete. Not only are they accepted by the Bhagavad Gita, the apogee of Indian spirituality; they are elevated to first place. It is true that this Yoga is purified from the last traces of magic (rigorous asceticism, etc.), and that the most important of its ancient techniques, pranayama, is reduced to a very minor role. It is true, too, that meditation and concentration here become instruments of an unio mystica with a God who reveals himself as a person. Nevertheless, the acceptance of yogic practices by the Vishnuist mystical and devotional trend proves the considerable popularity of these practices as well as their universality in India. Krishna’s discourse amounts to a validation, for all Hinduism, of Yoga technique regarded as a purely Indian means of obtaining mysitcal union with a personal God. By far the greater part of the modern yogic literature published in India and elsewhere finds its theoretical justification in the Bhagavad Gita.

This article was based on Mircea Eliade, Yoga: Immortality and Freedom, 1969.