The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali (Sri Swami Satchidananda)
Engaging, Uplifting, Flawed
[My 3-star Amazon review (NDA) of “The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali: Translation and Commentary†by Sri Swami Satchidananda.]
Beginning in 1971, when I began to practice hatha yoga using Swami Satchidanda’s “Integral Yoga Hatha†as my guide, I followed the career of this renowned guru until his death in 2002. When my first spiritual teacher, John R. Logan, informed me, in 1973, that Satchidananda was not the celibate he claimed be, but in fact was “taking advantage†of his female devotees, I began to doubt his purity – and years later when sex scandals involving Satchidanda became big news and led to the defection of 1/3 of his Integral Yoga Institute’s (IYI) membership, I can’t say that I was surprised. If you Google “Swami Satchidanada sex scandals,†you’ll find plenty of dirt on the popular swami.
Although I continued to pay attention to Satchidananda and IYI, I had little interest in Satchidanananda’s teachings, which I found remedial compared to Krishnamurti’s, Ramana Maharshi’s, Adi Da’s, and the traditions of Zen and Tibetan Buddhism. When, a few months ago, the idea to write a book on the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali hit me, I decided to revisit the teachings of Satchidananda by including his text on the Yoga Sutras as one of the books I would look at before writing my own on the subject.
I’ve taught Raja Yoga and have read seven different versions of the Yoga Sutras, so I bring a critical eye to any translation/commentary of Patanjali’s aphorisms. Given my familiarity with Satchidananda’s teachings, his version of the Yoga Sutras was pretty much what I expected it to be – engaging, uplifting, and flawed.
Satchidananda’s commentaries in this text are informal and copacetic – providing a reader-friendly experience. The commentaries are permeated with uplifting stories and sagely yogic advice that most readers will find both educational and inspiring. Satchidananda was a down-to-earth Capricorn, and his feet are planted firmly on the ground as he describes the particulars of Integral and Raja yoga practice.
The real problem with Satchidananda’s translation and commentary is that it is flawed and superficial. Those new to Yoga philosophy and the Yoga Sutras probably will not notice this – but to spiritual esotericists, this problem stands out like a sore thumb.
First off, his definitions of important Sankrit terms are poor. He doesn’t clearly explains any of the various samadhis that Patanjali mentions, and he defines samadhi as “contemplation,†which is ridiculous. He describes asamprajnata samadhi as “indistinguished,†and samprajnata samadhi as “distinguished.†Again, these are lousy descriptions. He’s not clear on other important terms like “citta,†which he defines as “mind-stuff.†Citta is simply universal Consciousness (Cit) functioning as human consciousness, which means consciousness in conjunction with mind, or “manas.†Moreover, Satchidanada provides us with an improper definition of manas: “the desiring faculty of mind-stuff.†“Manas†is simply mind in general, and to say that “mind-stuff†has a desiring faculty is absurd. A human being, or soul, could be said to have a desiring faculty, but not “mind-stuff.â€
Beyond his faulty definitions, Satchidananda makes too many flawed statements. At the very beginning of the text, he states, “Once you have made the mind thoughtless, you have attained the goal [of Yoga]. This is wrong. Even if the practice of Yoga involves stilling the mind, this is simply a means to eventually attaining Self-realization. Satchidananda knows this very well, but his sloppy writing doesn’t always reflect his understanding.
Elsewhere he writes, “Every desire binds you and brings restlessness. To get to liberation you have to be completely desireless… Is it possible to be desireless? No.†That makes liberation impossible – but then he tries to weasel out of this statement by rationalizing selfless service as the way beyond desire. But his rationalization fails to undo the contradiction.
With his background in Hindu spiritual philosophy, one would think that Satchidananda would be very familiar with Siva and Shakti in Hindu tantra, yet he writes, “The Tibetan tantric system speaks of Siva and Shakti. No, it doesn’t. Moreover Satchidananda displays his ignorance of Siva and Shakti when he reduces them to “positive and negative forces within each individual.â€
I could go on and on pointing out problems with this text, but I’m sure you get the picture by now.
[My 3-star Amazon review (NDA) of “The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali: Translation and Commentary†by Sri Swami Satchidananda.]
Beginning in 1971, when I began to practice hatha yoga using Swami Satchidanda’s “Integral Yoga Hatha†as my guide, I followed the career of this renowned guru until his death in 2002. When my first spiritual teacher, John R. Logan, informed me, in 1973, that Satchidananda was not the celibate he claimed be, but in fact was “taking advantage†of his female devotees, I began to doubt his purity – and years later when sex scandals involving Satchidanda became big news and led to the defection of 1/3 of his Integral Yoga Institute’s (IYI) membership, I can’t say that I was surprised. If you Google “Swami Satchidanada sex scandals,†you’ll find plenty of dirt on the popular swami.
Although I continued to pay attention to Satchidananda and IYI, I had little interest in Satchidanananda’s teachings, which I found remedial compared to Krishnamurti’s, Ramana Maharshi’s, Adi Da’s, and the traditions of Zen and Tibetan Buddhism. When, a few months ago, the idea to write a book on the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali hit me, I decided to revisit the teachings of Satchidananda by including his text on the Yoga Sutras as one of the books I would look at before writing my own on the subject.
I’ve taught Raja Yoga and have read seven different versions of the Yoga Sutras, so I bring a critical eye to any translation/commentary of Patanjali’s aphorisms. Given my familiarity with Satchidananda’s teachings, his version of the Yoga Sutras was pretty much what I expected it to be – engaging, uplifting, and flawed.
Satchidananda’s commentaries in this text are informal and copacetic – providing a reader-friendly experience. The commentaries are permeated with uplifting stories and sagely yogic advice that most readers will find both educational and inspiring. Satchidananda was a down-to-earth Capricorn, and his feet are planted firmly on the ground as he describes the particulars of Integral and Raja yoga practice.
The real problem with Satchidananda’s translation and commentary is that it is flawed and superficial. Those new to Yoga philosophy and the Yoga Sutras probably will not notice this – but to spiritual esotericists, this problem stands out like a sore thumb.
First off, his definitions of important Sankrit terms are poor. He doesn’t clearly explains any of the various samadhis that Patanjali mentions, and he defines samadhi as “contemplation,†which is ridiculous. He describes asamprajnata samadhi as “indistinguished,†and samprajnata samadhi as “distinguished.†Again, these are lousy descriptions. He’s not clear on other important terms like “citta,†which he defines as “mind-stuff.†Citta is simply universal Consciousness (Cit) functioning as human consciousness, which means consciousness in conjunction with mind, or “manas.†Moreover, Satchidanada provides us with an improper definition of manas: “the desiring faculty of mind-stuff.†“Manas†is simply mind in general, and to say that “mind-stuff†has a desiring faculty is absurd. A human being, or soul, could be said to have a desiring faculty, but not “mind-stuff.â€
Beyond his faulty definitions, Satchidananda makes too many flawed statements. At the very beginning of the text, he states, “Once you have made the mind thoughtless, you have attained the goal [of Yoga]. This is wrong. Even if the practice of Yoga involves stilling the mind, this is simply a means to eventually attaining Self-realization. Satchidananda knows this very well, but his sloppy writing doesn’t always reflect his understanding.
Elsewhere he writes, “Every desire binds you and brings restlessness. To get to liberation you have to be completely desireless… Is it possible to be desireless? No.†That makes liberation impossible – but then he tries to weasel out of this statement by rationalizing selfless service as the way beyond desire. But his rationalization fails to undo the contradiction.
With his background in Hindu spiritual philosophy, one would think that Satchidananda would be very familiar with Siva and Shakti in Hindu tantra, yet he writes, “The Tibetan tantric system speaks of Siva and Shakti. No, it doesn’t. Moreover Satchidananda displays his ignorance of Siva and Shakti when he reduces them to “positive and negative forces within each individual.â€
I could go on and on pointing out problems with this text, but I’m sure you get the picture by now.
