Inside/Outside: Merleau-Ponty/Yoga Author(s): Sundar Sarukkai Reviewed work(s): Source: Philosophy East and West, Vol. 52, No.

4 (Oct., 2002), pp. 459-478 Published by: University of Hawai'i Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1400273 . Accessed: 01/12/2011 07:44
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

University of Hawai'i Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Philosophy East and West.

http://www.jstor.org

INSIDE/OUTSIDE: MERLEAU-PONTY/YOGA
SundarSarukkai of AdvancedStudies,IndianInstitute Philosophyof Science Unit, NationalInstitute of Science Campus,Bangalore

The binary of inside and outside is a consequence of a duality inherent in many philosophical traditions.Any philosophy that critiquesand attemptsto go beyond this duality of transcendence and immanence has to deal with these notions in a a philosophical radicallydifferentway. It is pertinentto note here that articulating is to reflecton the here I intend to do What is itself of a 'side' problematical. concept notion of 'inside' from a phenomenological standpoint.I believe that this is most clearly manifestedin the space where yoga and phenomenologymeet. Among the phenomenological traditions in Western philosophy, Maurice thematizationof the body and the world allows for a more complex Merleau-Ponty's of understanding inside and outside. Buteven in his philosophythere is a recurring ambiguityin the use of inside/outside.Inthe firstsection of thisarticle,Idiscusscertain writings.While his philosophyapparexplicit uses of these termsin Merleau-Ponty's of the 'in' and 'out'as polarelements, his forecloses the possibility understanding ently and of explicit usage inside/outside,inner/outer, othersynonymoustermsneeds to be clarified.Along with this is his repeatedreferenceto dimensionality,thickness,corthis in/outdichotomy.Itis not clear poreality,and depth-terms thatseem to rephrase add clarityto the fundamentalambiguityof these terms. whetherthese rephrasings Although such an ambiguity is seemingly always present, I believe that it is possible to continue to use terms like inside and outside even while working from 'within'Merleau-Ponty's philosophy-if a phenomenologicalreadingof yogic and asanas pranayama)is allowed into his discourse. I will practices (essentially for this position by thematizingthe notion of 'inner body' without the necesargue saryconsequence of giving in to the transcendent/immanent duality.I will arguethat it is the phenomenologicalexperience of dimensionality,a term commonly used by him, that should be identifiedwith the 'inside'. This conclusion is furtherreinforced of the practice of yoga. Yoga, particuthrougha phenomenological understanding larly Hatha Yoga, in its emphasis on techniques of body control and breathing, allows for a rich phenomenological interpretation of the inner body. The emphasis on the inner body also leads us to consider the categories of eating and breathing of phenomenologicalexperiences.The possibilityof 'perceiving' along the trajectory the innerbody throughthese yogic methodssuggestsan additionto Merleau-Ponty's of consuming/consumed. examples of 'reversibility', namely the reversibility Insideand Outside in Merleau-Ponty A close reading of the chapter "The Intertwining-The Chiasm" in his book The Visible and the Invisible,and some working notes in the same book, highlightsa

Philosophy East & West Volume 52, Number 4 October 2002 459-478 ? 2002 by University of Hawai'i Press

459

fundamentalambiguityin Merleau-Ponty's philosophyof the body.1This has to do of the thematization and with dimensionality relatednotionslike corporeality, depth, inside, and outside with respectto the body, the world, and theirphenomenological implications. On the one hand, terms like inner,outer, inside, outside, interiority, and exteriabout the of seem to unity the body negate Merleau-Ponty's philosophy ority may and the world. Inside and outside, for example, must have a referencepoint or a boundarythroughwhich they get defined as such. The problemwith using a term view that the body is the world and the world like 'outside' lies in Merleau-Ponty's the body: "Whereare we to put the limitbetween the body and the world, since the to look at the world as world is flesh?"2 Accordingto this view, it would be incorrect seems to a demarcation between the outside the 'Outside' body. imply rigid being is is what he the world. This and exactly surrounding arguingagainst. Is it thing thereforepossible to talk of an 'inner'body without the implicationthat the world and the body are separate? The need to addressthe issue of the innerbody becomes clearerwhen we consider Merleau-Ponty's shiftingreferenceto the notionsof inside/outside,dimensionality, corporeality,thickness, and depth. It does seem that in places he uses these words 'synonymously'with one another.Among these, dimensionality plays an imit as much as it is makes of the what role. The visible, body dimensionality portant is the dimensionalityof things that allows their visibility. But what is this dimensionality? it is the phenomenonthat is primal;thus, it is not enough to ForMerleau-Ponty talk of dimensionalityas a theoretical or objective term. Following him, we can In tryingto explicate this notion ask, what is the phenomenon of dimensionality? of dimensionality,it becomes difficultnot to referto terms like inside/outside.To attempt to understandthis tension in using these terms without giving into their dualisticmeanings,we can look at certainexplicitcommentsby him on this issue. In the "Intertwining" chapter and in some working notes there are more than a few of this. examples In this chapterthere are many passing but explicit referencesto ideas of inner and outer, beginning with "a visible ... is rathera sort of straitsbetween exterior about the inside and outThereare more remarks horizonsand interiorhorizons."3 if "This can that follow: side of the body happen only my hand, while it is felt from used to within, is also accessible fromwithout...."4 His use of 'mass',traditionally associate dimensionalitywith ideas of substance, matter,and so on also atteststo "Betweenthe massive sentimentI have of the this ambiguityabout dimensionality: sack in which I am enclosed, and the controlfromwithoutthat my hand exercises over my hand... ."5 Note here the image of an enclosed body and the sack as the outer sheath of the 'innerbody'. Merleau-Ponty goes on to consider the relationshipbetween the seer and the visible. The very action of perceivingemphasizesthe distancebetween the perceiver and the perceived. "Itis that the thicknessof flesh between the seer and the thing is constitutiveforthe thingof its visibilityas forthe seer of his corporeity.... Itis forthe

460

PhilosophyEast& West

same reasonthat I am at the heartof the visible and that I am far from it: because it destinedto be seen by a body."6He uses two has thicknessand is therebynaturally and corporeity. He continues, "the here: thickness for dimensionality 'synonyms' thicknessof the body, far from rivalingthat of the world, is on the contrarythe sole means I have to go into the heart of the things, by making myself a world and by makingthem flesh."7 The body allows the 'outside'to be drawnentirelywithin it and "communicates to the things upon which it closes ... that divergence between the within and the withoutthatconstitutesthe natalsecret."8This referenceto the withinand without is furtherand more explicitly mentioned in the footnote at the end of this line, where he writes, "In any case, once a body-world relationshipis recognized, there is a of the world and a correspondenceberamification of my body and a ramification tween its inside and my outside, between my inside and its outside."9How does one make sense of this repeated referenceto inside and outside? I believe that as far as the body is concerned the notion of inside and outside does not repudiatethe intertwinement of the body and the world. Thus, although these terms are apparently loaded with the dualism that he would like to reject, he continues to use them but attemptsto suggest more complex images of their relationship. Soon after, Merleau-Pontyrefers to things as "not flat beings but beings in depth."'0 A few lines later:"Whatwe call a visible is ... the surface of a depth, a cross section upon a massive being...."" The use of 'depth' and 'massive' again points to their connection with dimensionality,but their use does littleto dispel the miasma surrounding these terms. C. Vasseleu points out that since the massive is it should not be seen as "matter, elemental corporeality," used as a "pre-subjective, or mind, or substanceof any kind."12 The notion of the visible, of the seer and the seen, gets implicated in a reversidea of the plays a central role in Merleau-Ponty's ibility. This idea of reversibility flesh. He gives the examples of touching/touched as also that of hearing myself/ others and in this latterexample once again explicitly mentions the outside and inside. "Likewise,I do not hear myself as I hear the others.... I have ratheran echo of its articulatedexistence, it vibratesthroughmy head ratherthan outside."'3 But this failureof complete reversibility is not a fault;it only atteststo a bodily synthesis. This synthesisoccurs "because I hear myself both fromwithin and without."'4 In his workingnotes there are more allusionsto inside/outside.In reemphasizing the noncoincidence of the seer and the visible-there is always a chiasm between them-he notes: "Thethingstouch me as I touch them and touch myself:flesh of the world-distinct from my flesh: the double inscriptionoutside and inside. The inside receives withoutflesh: not a 'psychic state'but intra-corporeal, reverseof the outside that my body shows to the things."'5Thus, he points to the dialectic of separation and union. There is thus in Merleau-Ponty's usage of inside/outsidean ambiguityin their When he mentions the dream as 'inside' he qualifies it this way: "the inmeanings. ternaldouble of the externaldouble is inside."'6 His ideas on the invisiblealso carry with it these notions, thus implyingthe inside as non-corporeal.Forexample: "the

Sundar Sarukkai 461

invisibleis what, relativeto the visible, could neverthelessnot be seen as a thing (the innerframework)."17 This existentialsof the visible, its dimensions,its non-figurative ambiguity persists in a later note on the chiasm: "chiasm my body-the things, realized by the doubling up of my body into inside and outside-and the doubling The association of inside and up of the things (their inside and their outside)."18 inoutside with respect to things betraysthe ideas of corporeality/dimensionality herent in his usage of inside and outside. Ifthe inside world, or "mindas the other then they should be absent side of the body"19 only refersto some non-corporeality, in things. By referring to the things and their inside and outside, Merleau-Ponty makesthis ambiguitymore explicit. Butat the same time, in the same note, he says, "thereis inside and outside turningabout one another." of the body as "the conformityof the internal His comments on the interiority leaf with the external leaf, theirfolding back on one another,"having "neverbeen Here it seems as a non-corporealinteriority. seems to place this interiority apart,"20 to be synonymouswith invisibility,and the folding back equivalentto the reversor internalis difibilityof the visible and the invisible. Butthis notion of interiority ferentfromthe explicit use of the inside of the body in its corporeality. of the 'inner',one dominantlyrelatedto ideas Thereis yet anotherinterpretation as a philosopherof the of inner life. Many writerscontinue to view Merleau-Ponty 'inside'. In an edited book dealing with this aspect of Merleau-Ponty's philosophy, oeuvre D. Olkowski notes that there is a sustainedengagement in Merleau-Ponty's of the "interior" of between "the with the relationship continuity subjectand aspects Butthe notion of 'inside' here is circumscribed of the world."21 the "exteriority" by the phenomenaof innerlife. The associationof the innerwith the inner(psychic)life also leads Galen Johnsonexplicitlyto caution againstthe use of any imagesof spaButnowhere in these discussionsdo the idea of inner.22 tializationin understanding we find any detailed attemptto explicate the idea of the 'inner'body. The lack of view the body as a homogeneousentity, such a discussionsuggeststhatthese writers a phenomenologyof the because of which there is little possibilityof articulating innerbody. reasonfor this continued ambiguityregarding I believe that the most important the notion of innerwith respectto the body is to be found in the absence of a tradition of lived experience of the inner body in the West, one that could have been In in a mannersimilarto the case historiesof Schneider.23 used by Merleau-Ponty contrast,the phenomenologicalexperiences of yoga stronglysuggestthe possibility of a lived experience of the inner body. The next section will discuss the different this notion of the innerbody. ways in which we can understand TheInnerBody I begin with the claim that it is possible to have phenomenologicalexperiences of the inner body. To explicate this claim, we need to explore the idea of dimensionWe also need to incorporatetwo ality, a term commonly used by Merleau-Ponty. common categoriesassociatedwith bodilyexperience, namelyeatingand breathing.

462

PhilosophyEast& West

he does not discuss these two categories in detail, but it is clear that Surprisingly, they are of fundamental importance in any philosophy of the body. (I associate these two 'activities'is excretingwith eating and breathinghere.)What distinguishes theirdefiningpresence in any thematizationof the body while at the same time they provide us with what I believe are the most compelling reasons for believing in a transcendentworld. These categories point to the necessity of enlargingMerleauof the body. Ponty'svocabularyand expandingthe meaningof interiority Beforeproceedingfurther,we have to ask whetherthe use of inside/outsideby as described in the previoussection, violates his explicit attemptsat Merleau-Ponty, breaking the transcendence/immanenceduality. Although at first reading it may seem so, I do not believe this to be the case. Merely 'voicing' the inside/outsidedoes not necessarilyimply this duality.One can hold on to the formulation of the flesh as the element of being-of body and the world intertwined as flesh-and also the notionof inside/outside.Thisusage leads to the dichotomy only if there is a correspondingontology of a transcendental world, removedand disjointedfromthe body. Inthis contextthe use of insideand outside is a way to designatethe boundarybetween the object and the world. The use of these terms by Merleau-Ponty does not necessarily imply an ontological division of the object and the world. In fact, as he mentionsin his notes, the inside and outside are two leaves "foldingback on one another"and "which have never been apart,"24 thus offeringone suggestion on how to imagine inside/outsidewithout the corresponding dualisticontology. From Merleau-Ponty's standpoint,the idea of inner body makes little sense. There is justthe body: no innerand outerbodies. Beinga body also impliesbeing in dimensionality.The idea of inner body has gained currencyonly within the dualist tradition,notably the scientific one. Innerbody is understoodas the collection of organs, blood vessels, and so on that constituteand make possible the body. It is an there is no philosophicalmeritin isolating X-rayedbody. FollowingMerleau-Ponty, this X-rayedbody as a separateentityor using it to arguefor a 'category'called inner body. I would suppose that for him the heart is an organ like the hand except that there are differentmodes of presentation of these organs.Butusingthe word 'organs' is itself to give in to a biological model. So the apt explanationwould be that the hand and the heart(and the whole body) are one and should not be seen as a set of the relationshipof 'inner separate organs. It seems to me that for Merleau-Ponty organs'to the body is similarto thatof the body and the world:where are we to put the limit between either of them? Thus, if I want to discuss the idea of inner body while tryingto stay within his philosophy, I cannot begin with the biological body, because it is not the 'inner' body. But there is something else I can do: reflecton the notion of dimensionality that Merleau-Ponty refersto so frequently.The primordiality of dimensionalityhides within it this notion of innerbody. One may respond here by saying that I am investingtoo much in the notion of 'inner'. It may be arguedthat there is reallyvery littleat stake in this usage of inner and outer once we see the body as 'unified'. My response would be to say that

SundarSarukkai

463

merelycalling the body a unifiedor dimensionalbeing only postponesthe inevitable question of the bodily experience of the 'inner'.The idea of innerthat I am suggesting here is one that is based on the phenomenologicalexperience of dimensionality itself. And since this experience arises from the body and is constructedin it, we cannot escape the referenceto our own experience of 'inner'body. the perceptionof the world is dependent on and Accordingto Merleau-Ponty, the world as we shaped by the way we perceive and use our body. We understand would the body. Thisview when extendedto the ideas of dimensionality understand of of and the world is itself bethe that our dimensionality things imply 'perception' But how do we this of our own of our cause dimensionality. experience perception 'phenomenon'of dimensionality? If our perceptionof the world is the consequence of the body and its motility, then we understandthe dimensionalityof the world by first experiencing and the dimensionalityof the body. Merleau-Ponty's example of the perunderstanding ception of a house is useful here. Everyact of perception, spatial and temporal, continues to contributeto our perceptionof a house. Thus,we 'know'the back of a house or of a cube because of our perceptionfromdifferentperspectives.Butthis is not enough. I believe that before we 'know' the back of the cube, we 'know' of the frontand the back. its 'inside';we are aware of the dimensionality'separating' 'Inside'standsfor this 'distance'.Insideis not a 'side'. It merelycapturesa qualityof of perspectiveitself. 'sides'. Itcapturesthe boundednessof sides and the invisibility we are the back of the are aware of So, before we alreadyaware of the object, dimensionalityof the object that createsthe idea of 'back.' Given a line, we do not presumea backside.Thereis no backsideto a line because we recognizethe lack of dimensionalityin it. Can it of objects so readily? And how is it thatwe recognizethis 'dimensionality' of our body and, more importantly, be because we firstrecognizethe dimensionality I a back not only because I see others I know have this dimensionality? experience like me havinga back but also because I experiencethe back throughthe sensations it generates.By this experience of the back I also experience 'dimensionality'. is pheThus the basic point to which we are attractedis that 'dimensionality' nomenologicallyaccessible. The idea of dimensionalityfirstarises througha 'perception' of the innerbody that allows us to graspthe notion of dimensionalityitself. this is to view the innerbody as being in a reversible One of the ways to understand relationof touching/touchedwith the 'outer'of the body. Dimensionalityis implicated in the 'non-coincidence' of the front and back only because it can also be perceived as the experience of the inside. Now we are in a position to state this: This idea of inside has inside is the phenomenologicalexperience of dimensionality. no allegiance to the notionof side and thus is not indebtedto ideas of boundaryand separation.Ifone can talkof the insidewithoutthe idea of boundaryand ontological separationthen there is no contradictiongeneratedin the use of inside even while to Merleau-Ponty's philosophyof the body. subscribing that we find a It is throughthis phenomenologicalexperience of dimensionality an of a without inside about talk to inside/outsideduality necessaryimplication way

464

Philosophy East & West

and without being circumscribedby constrainingnotions of sides. In understanding inside as a phenomenological moment, not only is the idea of dimensionalityclarified but also the idea of inside. It is possible to talk of such a momentonly because the body has alreadyexperienced dimensionalityin its everyday 'perception'of its inner body and the 'space' that goes to constitute this inner body. This is what I mean when I claim that 'inside' is nothingmore than the phenomenologicalexperience of dimensionality.And the practiceof yoga allows us to get a hold on this experience in a conscious manner. This view is also the reason why the objectified 'external' space, the space around us, is seen as 'outside' ratherthan inside. External space has no phenomethree-dimensional when it is seen as a mathematical space. nological consequence The phenomenological experience of space arises outside this particular construction of mathematicalspace. In a manner similarto the association of inside and there is an associationof the outside and depth. It is well knownthat dimensionality, for Merleau-Ponty depth is the 'firstdimension' and not the 'third'dimension after and breadth. The primordiality of depth manifestsitself in some kind of perlength and Edward ception Casey, in discussingdepth and voluminousnessin experience. the context of Merleau-Ponty, argues that William James and James Gibson were those who this natureof depth.25 James,for example, among emphasized primordial considered depth as "felt volume."26The shift toward these experiences of depth constitutesits phenomenologicalmoment. I would like to borrowthis notionof depthto complete my construction of inside and outside as phenomenological experiences. Outside, in this rewriting,is the phenomenological experience of 'depth'. It is being 'outside' that generates the notion of depth, the sense of distance and space itself. Depth is not bounded within the inside. It does not arise in a bounded domain. Depth is space, externalspace, differentfrom internalspace, not throughsome ontological division but essentially througha particular experience of the body. The body experiences inside and outside in qualitativelydifferentways. Thus my conclusion: what dimensionalityis to inside, depth is to outside. I must add here that this is not the idea of depth that is or, for that matter,in Casey. There is no separationof the present in Merleau-Ponty 'inside' and 'outside' with their special connections to dimensionalityand depth, respectively.But I would arguethatthe idea of depth and relatedphenomenological experiences of it (includingthe depth cues and so on) is essentiallylinkedto the idea of externality.The experience of dimensionalityis captured not only in the practice of yoga but also in the most basic human activity of eating itself. There is an undeniable intertwiningbetween eating and the inside and, correspondingly, with excretion and the outside. Eatingis the firstand final proof of transcendence. Merleau-Ponty's example of the infantand its relationshipwith its motherseems to be grantingthis point. As M. C. Dillon notes: the infant's"mouth recognizes the transcendenceof Motherrightfromthe start."27 the entanglement So, to understand of eating and inside is not to reduce it only to its literal meaning. Rather,eating fills it with the fullnessof transcendence.We eat opens up this silent dimensionality, the worldand the world eats us.

SundarSarukkai

465

The body experience of eating is equivalentto the phenomenologicalexperience of dimensionalityand thus is intertwined with the notion of 'inside'. The process of eating is nevervisible to us. Further actions relatedto eating,such as mashing the food, swallowing,and so on, are all events in the 'darkside' of the body. We can never 'see' ourselveseating, but we experience it all the time. We experience swallowing the food; we experience its passage throughthe food pipe into the regionof the stomach. These experiences all constitutean experience of dimensionality,an expression of the 'inside' of the body. We are usually unawareof these processes except in times of pain and distressof the innerbody. Butpracticeslike yoga allow us a continuous,conscious graspof the innerbody. As with eating, so also with breathing.The transcendence associated with breathingis not so clearly manifestedas in the case of eating. Butbreathingis literally the same as eating when seen on the orderof consumption.BeforeI enter into the discussion on consumption,I wish to explore here the link between breathing and the inside of the body, namely the experience of dimensionality.The phenomenological experience of breathingis most powerfullycapturedby the yogic This experience is akin to a mode of perceptionof the inner practiceof pranayama. body itself. TheIdea of the Inner(Body)in Yoga Firstof all, it must be mentionedthat there are differentmeaningsassociated with yoga as well as differentkinds of yoga such as Rajayoga, Hathayoga, and so on. Althoughthis word is derivedfromthe Sanskrit yuj, meaningunion, it is not always circumscribedby it. As S. C. Banerjipoints out, differenttexts convey different meanings of yoga.28 For example, the Bhagavadgita suggests yoga as a means of attainingunion with God.29Banerjilists some of these differentmeaningsof yoga: skill in work, desirelessaction, acquisitionof true knowledge, indifference to pleasure and pain, addition (in arithmetic), and conjunction (in astronomy).30 It is importantto note here that in the primaryand most importantmanuscriptof yoga, (hereafterYS),yoga "does not mean union, but only namely Patafjali's Yogasutras effort."31 The effortis that which is describedclearly in the second sutraof the YS: of the fluctuations of mind-stuff."32 "yoga is the restriction In the following discussion on yoga, I will be concerned only with the texts of (hereafterHYP) and some Patanjali'sYS and Svatmarama's Hathayoga-PradTpika relevantcommentarieson them. I will also restrictmyself to an elaborationof the ideas of inner/internal/inside in these texts, after which I will undertakea pheof nomenological interpretation the yogic postures. The notion of the internaloccurs explicitly in both the YS and the HYP The firstand most important referenceto this is in the understanding of the mind as an 'internalorgan'of the body. Bhojaraja's on the YS refers to the mind as commentary the internalorgan that is always open to fluctuations.33 also makes a refVacaspati erence to the effect that the mind-stuff is used "as a partialexpressionfor the inner organs (antahkarana)."34It mustbe mentionedhere that, strictlyspeaking,karanain

466

PhilosophyEast& West

antahkaranais means/instrument ratherthan a physical organ. But the use of the word 'organ'derives its force fromthe classificationof the mind as an internalorgan that is similarto the organsof sense and action, an associationthat repeatedlyoccurs in Samkhyatexts. Itis also pertinent to rememberhere thatthese texts usuallyreferto eleven organs:five of the senses, five of action, and mind.35The mind is open to fluctuations,and YS 1.6 lists five kinds of these: evidence, misconception, fancy, sleep, and memory.36The 'effort'of yoga is to hinder these modificationsand to leave the internalorgan free from such changes. Patanjalisays that exercise and dispassion(1.12)hinderthese changes. Thus, concentration(as the effort,as yoga) is the path to still the ever-distracted mind. Since the mind is an internalorgan and yoga an effortto restrict the fluctuations of the mind, we must expect yoga to be able to suggest how one can control (a) an organ and (b) that which is internal.This implies that rightin the very definitionof yoga there is alreadyan involvementin the idea of inner(body). But at this point it is still not clear as to the meaning of 'internal'used in the context of the mind. Is the internalin opposition to externalorgans?Is the mind internalbecause it is not 'seen'? Further and 11.18, there is a definite on, in sutras11.17 clue that can answer this query. In these sutras, it is mentioned that one of the 'afflictions'that hinder concentrationhas to do with the 'visual'. The suspicion of the 'visual'arises because of the possible contaminationand distraction of the mind the by objects-of-sight. BeforeI discuss further the implicationsof these observations,the explicit use of internalin the context of pranayamamust be noted. In Book II, sutra29, Patanjali gives the eight aids for yoga. Out of these, I will be concerned only with the third and fourthones, namely asanas (postures)and pranayama(controlof breath).Sutra 11.46introducesthe asanas by emphasizing the stable and pleasant natureof postures.37The posture should be comfortable,it must have "no cause of pain," and, when this is accomplished, the "obstaclesto meditationno longer prevail."38 It is worthwhile noticing the importanceof postures in the yogic project of ultimately stilling the fluctuationsof the mind. Althoughthe relationof internalorgans to the various asanas is not detailed in the YS,the real importof it is clearly explained in the variouscommentarieson the YSand HYP I believe that we can mount a strong to the effect thatthe controlof the physical, internalorgansof the body is a argument model for the ultimatecontrolof the mind (as an internalorgan).This is explained by the importancegiven to asanas and pranayamain the practice of yoga. It is not an accident that the postureshave to be 'steady' in the same way that the mind has to be steady. I will argue in the next section that the asanas allow for a phenomenological experience (and control)of the inner body. As a naturalcorollary,then, the practice of yoga allows for the phenomenological experience (and control) of the 'inner'mind. Followingthe sutrason posturesin Book IIare sutras50 and 51 on the regulation of breath, prianyama. These sutras use the ideas of internal and external of the breathis classifiedas external,internal,and explicitly. Insutra50, the restraint steady/suspension.The idea of externaland internalis with respectto the body, as is

SundarSarukkai

467

made clear in Vacaspati'scommentarywhen he statesthat externalityis inferredby the causing of the "motion in a blade of grass or a piece of cotton in a windless inferredby an "internal touch" that begins "at the sole of the spot," and internality feet and extends to the head."39 The externalrefersto the processof takingin the air from outside; the internalcorrespondsto expelling the internalair to the outside.40 with This makesexplicit the point thatthe internaland externalare to be understood in made the is a subtle distinction next to the There sutra, respect physical body. is introduced. The firstthreepra,nayamashave to sutra51, where a fourthpranayama and expiration,and suppressionof breath do with restraining breathafterinspiration of breaththatoccurs in is a effort." The fourth "by single prinayama also suppression awarenessof both the internaland externalspheres/fields/objects. Let me briefly summarize the notion of the internal in the YS. The mind/ mind-stuffis the internalorgan-of what? Although not made explicit, it is clear that the internalis with referenceto the body. This can be adduced fromthe use of internaland external in pranayama,the classificationof organs (of the body), the to create fluctuationsin the mind, the focus on both exterpower of objects-of-sight is clearlywith referenceto the body, and also, finally,in nal and internal that objects the suggestion that mind can be freed from the body and roam 'outside' it after This explicit physiologyof the inner is yogic state (111.38). reachingthe appropriate which offersa "plan of the body" to the yogi. Vyasa's also inherentin sutra111.29, of the body on this adds thatthe yogi can apprehendthe structure sutra commentary after samyamaon the navel.41He furtherdescribes the general physiology of the body, namely that the corporealelements are seven: skin, blood, flesh, fat, bone, to note here is thateach one of these is seen marrow,and semen. What is important also makesthis clear: "The to the other. Sarkara'ssubcommentary as being interior order of the list is, that each is exteriorto the one which it precedes"42-skin is the outermost,then blood, and so on. The idea of internalis also predicatedon the priorityto vision and sight. The language of perception is itself dominantlyvisual accordedto vision is This priority althoughreferencesto sound occur intermittently. in with shares Western the YS that philosophy general,where metaphors something and the inner The internal of its the course have of vision manydiscourses.43 shaped are thus in the dark,and the mind, being 'internal',is also placed withinthe tensions of the visible and the invisible. Since my concern here is with the inner body, I a method to merely wish to point out that yoga, as a practice, is most importantly of the inner of which the because invisible the internal, body, or the grasping grasp discourse. of its 'organs'of the innerbody, is a naturalconsequence We should rememberhere that the philosophicalideas of the body in yoga are the distinctionbetaken over fromthe Samkhyaphilosophicalsystem. In particular, tween the gross and subtle body is one that is firstdetailed in the Samkhyatexts. As The ideas Sinha notes, yoga "is the practiceof the Samkhya,which is the theory."44 of in the found be can subtle (SPS) and of gross Samkhya-Pravachana-Sutram body to which refers in the to note thatsutra111.34 asanas, SPS, Kapila.(Itis also interesting Book III in YSin which asanasare introduced.) is exactly the same as the sutra(11.46) states of the SPSdeals in detail with the more general natureof the body. Sutra111.7

468

PhilosophyEast& West

that the gross body is one "producedfromthe fatherand mother,"while the subtle The subtlebody, body is not so since it is "producedat the beginningof creation."45 is made of seventeen elements (111.9) and the gross referredto as the Lihga-SarTra, The of five elements definition of the whether subtle or (111.17). principle body, body serves as the of The it the House vehicle Experience."46 gross body gross, is "that is for the subtle body. Itis in this sense thatthe "Grossis also treatedas a Body."47 The is of atomic size (111.14), subtle body is not to be confused with the Self (111.13), and so on. What should be noted in the context of the discussion here is that the notion of internalbody is not that of the subtle body. In fact, it may be argued that the importancegiven to the subtle body in Samkhyaand yoga negates a serious considerationof the notion of the inner as in the dimensionalityof the body. It is the in the HYP, that makes a phenomenemphasis on asanas and pranayama,primarily inner terms of the of ology body (in dimensionality) possible. The YSdoes not describe the asanas, the various body posturesthat are now commonly seen as a partof yoga. The predominanttext that does this is the HYP where the sutrasdetail the various postures.In this text, it is clearly stated that "the interioris to be seen," and such a seeing is describedas a consequence of sambhavT To see the inneris also to close out the outer,to subjugateall the senses by mucdra.48 concentration.Once the externalsenses are subdued,then the voices of the internal body can be heard.Inthe rightposturesand with the abolitionof the externalsenses (senses that are open to the external),the HYPsays the Nada can be heard (IV:68): "jinglingsound[s] (like that of ornaments)... are heard in the (middleof) the body" (IV:70); "the sound of [the] kettle drum"... (IV:73);the "sound of drum is heard in ... the space between eyebrows"(IV:74); "atthe end, the sounds of small bells, flute, lute, and bees" (IV:85, 86). All of these form a discourse of the internal,of the inner body. Along with this, we should understandasanas as attemptsto make 'visible'the innerbody. This makingvisible throughhearing,grasping,touching,and controllingthe innerorgans is the phenomenologicalexperience of the innerbody. Yogaand the PhenomenologicalExperienceof Dimensionality I use yoga here as Merleau-Pontyuses Schneider's case studies. He reinterprets Schneider's experiences through new philosophical categories. He does not use either the dominant mechanistic or psychologistic explanations but argues for a position 'between' them. My use of yoga to exemplifythe notion of 'inner'workson similar lines. I do not analyze the discourse of yoga; I do not believe that this discourse pays sufficient heed to the phenomenological importof its own practices. Nor do I want to subscribe to a mere biological view of yoga as exercises of the of the yogic practices is an intermediateposition physical body. My interpretation between these two extremes.What is of interestto me, and of relevance here, is a of yogic practiceswith respectto the body and the phenomenologicalunderstanding about the natureof the innerbody. possible insightsthey give How can innerorgans be graspedand controlled?As mentionedearlier,the YS mentions asanas as one of the aids of yoga but does not list out the variouspostures

SundarSarukkai

469

that are now commonly associated with the practiceof yoga. Vyasa'scommentary on sutra11.46lists a few asanas, but it is the HYPthat discusses the asanas in more detail. The HYP (1.33) mentions that "eighty-four asanas have been studied by Siva."49 The more complex posturescorresponding to the mudrasand bandhasare also mentionedin varioussutrasof the HYPFollowingthe description of some of the is not indeasanas, Book II of the HYPdeals mostly with pranayama.Pranayama of and different of use different asanas. And pendent asanas, practices breathing for most of these asanas and prniayama, the beneficial aspect on the inner body is explained. For example, 11.16says that "all diseases are destroyed by proper cures diseases like gulma (chronicenlargementof the prinayama";the MayOrasana Savasana removes and so on. Performing these asanas is spleen) (1.31); fatigue(1.32); to be involved in an engagementwith the innerbody that is similarto graspingand controllingthem as we do with objects outside the body. In this context, it is useful to note that the HYPalso mentionssix acts for purifying the (inner)body (11.21, 22, it (11.24). 23). Dhautiinvolvesswallowinga piece of wet cloth and then withdrawing In 11.25it is mentionedthat this process of cleaning cures bronchialdisordersand leprosy, among other things. A method of washing that involves taking in water Neti involves insertingthread throughthe throughthe anus is called vasti (11.26). nasal passage (11.29), and it is remarked that this "destroys the multitudeof diseases above the shoulders"(11.30). (occurring) Morecomplex mudrasand bandhasare also integralto Hathayoga.Ten mudras "which destroysenility and death."50 are listed in 111.7 These mOdras and bandhas are quite complex to perform,and for each of them the correspondingeffects on the body are mentioned. Forexample, 111.55 mentions UddTyanabandha, which is effected by the "drawingback of [the]abdomen above and below [the] navel."51It to note thatmostof these asanasare still practicedby manypractitioners is important of yoga today. This continuityallows us to view these texts as forminga partof a of yoga. Infact, thereare many new asanas,not listed in the HYP, lived tradition that of yoga. have been introducedinto the largerliterature in is the more complex bandcontention that these (and postures particular My has) function as if they 'make visible' the 'internalorgans'.The influentialbook on yoga postures by B.K.S. lyengar that details many asanas has this to say about or catching hold of. It bandhas:"Bandhameans bondage, joiningtogether,fettering is also a posture in which certain organs or partsof the body are contractedand Not only do they make visible in the context of pointingbut the varicontrolled."52 ous posturesalso allow one to 'grasp'these organs.These postureshelp to 'contract and control' certainorgans or partsof the inner body. Throughthese posturesone the can literally graspand manipulatea stomach,for example, as we can manipulate hand. The asanas are specific in theiractions and are generallycorrelatedwith speof the abdomen, kidcific organs.Thus,there are posturesthat allow manipulations that increase are There other and various digestive powers, postures organs. neys, posturesthroughwhich the liver and spleen are activated,and posturesfor regulating the thyroidgland, and so on. Forexample, the pose resemblinga locust resting

470

PhilosophyEast& West

on the ground helps those with a slipped disc. It also keeps the bladder and the prostategland healthy.53 Thereis an emphasison the notion of innerbody in many of these postures.The form of the postureseems to have been designed in orderto be effective particular on specific organs. So, just as doing exercises for the arms builds the muscles on them, the asanas negotiatewith the innerorgans in similarways. This leads to quite complex forms of these postures.Forexample, lyengarwrites that the postureof a boat with oars is effective on intestines,whereas the postureof the boat alone acts on the liver, gallbladder,and spleen.54 Even in the rules for doing the exercises the innerbody. Here is one of graspingand manipulating there is a clear articulation direction for one of the postures:"Inhalecompletely. Tightenthe entire abdomen fromthe anus to the diaphragm.Pullthe abdomen back towardsthe spine and also up towardsthe diaphragm."55 the asanas we are able to access phenomenological Thus, throughperforming of yoga knows, to experiences corresponding the inner body. As any practitioner even at the basic level the practice of these postures draws one's consciousness 'inward'.In the case of more complex bandhasthis is made even more explicit. of innerorgans, We should note an important point here. lyengar'sidentification in the language of modern biology, does not constitutethe complete phenomenological experience of yoga. These postureswere elaboratedupon thousandsof years ago when presumablythe inner organs had not been mapped and taken into the orbitof the biological body. The only feasible explanationabout the effect of these postureson the respectivepartsof the innerbody is thatthere is an alreadyavailable phenomenologicalexperience of these innerorgansthat is opened up by the yogic practice.The phenomenologicalconsequence of these postureslies in theirabilityto of the body and place it in the 'same level allow us a graspon the internal'structure' of visibility'as the externalhand. is concerned In the eight steps of yoga, pranayamafollows asanas. Pranayama with inhalation,exhalation, retention,and controlof breath.Powerfulyogic powers are ascribedto the practiceof pranayama, and it is supposed to be dangerousif not is also essentiallyinward learnedunderproperguidance. The practiceof pranayama like most of the asanas. While doing pranayamathe eyes are kept closed so that the outer world will not intrudeon the senses and violate this inwardexperience. lyengar states this explicitly: "In the practice of prianayma the senses are drawn inwards."56Like the asanas, the practice of pranayamais also one that has an essential engagementwith the inner body, both in the phenomenologicalaspect of this practice and in the beneficial effects on specific organs like the liver, spleen, (HYP11.63), pancreas, and the abdominal muscles.57Forexample, in the Bhastrika the breath should be "felt to resound in heart, throat and up to skull."58In the the breathis felt fromthe "hairon the head to the nail-tips (HYP11.50), Suryabhedna of toes,"59that is, all over the inner body. Once again, we note that the phenomenological experience of pranayamaallows a 'perception'of the inner body. It also makes possible our experience of the dimensionalitythat 'fills'our body. A sketchy

SundarSarukkai

471

account like the one above may seem like a simplification of the complex discursive structure of yoga. However, my interestis not to initiatea criticaldiscussionof this to state my belief thatpranayama and the morecomplex asanas discourse,but rather should be seen as avenues that make possible a 'perception', in particularthe touching of the inner body. Such an idea must informMerleau-Ponty's philosophy is intrinsically linkedwith perception. especially since his centralidea of reversibility the yogic bodily practicesnot in termsof its own discourse Thus, I would reinterpret but in termsof perceptionand the phenomenologicalexperience of the 'inside'. I believe that the idea of perceptionof the inner body complementsMerleauof the innerbody to Ponty'sprojectregarding body and the world. Therelationship the outer is the relationship of the body to the world.'Before'the intertwinement of the body and the world as flesh, there is 'already'an intertwinement of the innerand outer as body and flesh. The intertwining of the innerand outer body is made possible because the inner body can be perceived and touched in the acts of eating, excreting,breathing,and so on. As mentioned before, I suspect that there is comparativelylittle importance because of the absence of a lived yogic primarily given to this idea in Merleau-Ponty work on the philosophyof discourse in the West. It is surprising that such insightful the body neglects a deeper readingof eating, breathing,and excreting.The neglect of breathingcan perhapsbe understoodbecause in the Westerntraditionbreathing In the Indianyogic tradition, has become an objectifiedact, a biological rhythm.60 of breathingis refinedto a high by contrast,the phenomenologicalunderstanding a further illustrates degree. Thisphenomenologicalapproachto controlledbreathing into of of the even while we remain an the discourse body way, opening interiority within Merleau-Ponty's project. And we remain within his project for the simple reason that his philosophy, among the Western philosophers, comes closest to the phenomenologicalimportof yogic practices. understanding of Consumingand Consumed TheReversibility relatedto the notion of reversibility. is intrinsically Perception,for Merleau-Ponty, The importanceof this idea to him is best capturedby his commentthat reversibility in Merleau-Ponty's work owes its The idea of reversibility is the "ultimatetruth."61 of touching and touched, a simulgenesis to the phenomenologicalunderstanding taneous experience that occurs when one hand touches another. This, extended of the seer and seen. Lawrence to the domain of vision, suggests the reversibility thesis Hass notes that "Merleau-Ponty's expressesrealityas a reciprocal reversibility envelopment between seer and seen, touching and being touched, which defies analysis through disjunctive categories, and yet provides the very ground for
them."62

I arguedearlierthat yogic practices,both in body posturesand breathing,make possible a conscious attemptto 'touch', 'grasp',and 'manipulate'the 'inner'body. Thus, there is a phenomenologicalsimilaritybetween the touching/touchedof the left and righthand and the touching/touchedof the innerand 'outer'body. Because

472

PhilosophyEast& West

there is reversibility that essentially characterizesthis relationof touching/touched, there is no disjunctionbetween the ideas of inner and outer body. Thus, the possibility of perceptionof the innerbody necessitatesthe takingover of it into the folds of reversibility. The discussion of yoga and the phenomenologyof the inner body also suggest anotheradditionto the examples of reversibility as articulated As by Merleau-Ponty. much as touching is a paradigmatic example of graspingthe innerbody, there is yet another image of consumption as a mode of perception of the inner body. The examples of eating and breathingare exemplarsthat suggestthatthere is yet another that our reflectionson inner body necessitate. This is the category of reversibility of consuming/consumed.In the case of vision, Merleau-Ponty reversibility says that to see is also to be seen. Althoughthis symmetryis never possible in full, it is this that is responsiblefor the intertwining of the body and the world. Since reversibility the body is implicatedin the flesh of the world, perception itself "is the relationof flesh to itself,"63 thus establishinga position that does not demand the extremes of immanence or transcendence.Butalreadywithin this view of the body/worldthere is an underlyingnotion of 'consumption'. Just as there is seer/seen, touching/touched reversibility,eating implies an eating/eaten reversibility.Eatingis the first paradigmof the body's 'grasping'of transcendence. At this point it may be useful to reflect back on Merleau-Ponty's where he emphasizes the ontological implicationsof Phenomenologyof Perception, the differencein pointingand grasping.64 In the case of eating, there is not only the concrete grasping of the world but also a process of consuming it and placing it 'within'one's own body. Neither vision nor touch accomplishes this as well as eating does. The consumptionof 'matter'is the firstconscious act of the child when it suckles milk. Consumptionilluminatesnot just the possibilityof a transcendental world but also groundsit in the body concretely. Since the body and the world are not two objective entities distinctfrom each other, consumptionimplies cannibalism:the flesh 'consumes' itself. In fact, it is this that inspiresthe view that perception is inherentlycannibalistic in character.Perception is consumption-a self-consumption.This is also a naturalextension to of the body. Inthe "Intertwining" Merleau-Ponty's understanding chapter,he writes: "Thussince the seer is caught up in what he sees, it is still himselfhe sees: there is a fundamentalnarcissismof all vision."65Butthere is more! Vision is not merely narcissistic but leads into the world of consumption and self-consumption-leads to cannibalism. It is objective thought that makes the mistakeof separatingthe consumingand the consumed because even as the body consumes the world, the world consumes the body. The latteris exemplified in the visibilityof excretion but also remainsmore than that. Because the body and the world share the flesh, consumption becomes the dominantmarkernot only of perceptionbut also of being-in-theworld itself.66 of the consuming/consumedshould be seen on Thus,the reversibility the orderof the other manifestations of reversibility. What has this got to do with the inside?Understanding eating merely as a biological process 'inside' the body is once again to give into dualism. On the other

Sundar Sarukkai

473

hand, there are many phenomenologicalexperiences of eating. This includes feelings like hunger,pain, fullness, nausea, and so on. These experiences of eating belong to the phenomenologicalexperiences of dimensionalityand are more powerful than seeing or touching. The latter are 'two-dimensional'; they are 'pointers' of dimensionalityand do not 'grasp'it as such-once again underliningMerleauPonty's distinction between pointing and grasping. One can have an illusion of vision, but how does one have illusionsof eating?Consumingthe world and experiencing it as partof the innerbody would be the phenomenologicalexperience of thickness,and so on. dimensionality, it is also within the notion of consumptionthat the ideas of dimensionalThus, ity lie. Is it possible for a 'dimensionless'body to 'consume', or, equivalently,is it possible for us to eat a 'dimensionless'thing?Perceptionis consumptionand selfconsumption.It is narcissismand cannibalism.The consumptionof the world/body also contributesto the 'perception'of dimensionality.Not only are the experiences of eating the phenomenologicalexperiencesof the innerbody but they stand in defense of Merleau-Ponty's view of the inside and outside. The phenomenologicalexperience of breathing,of which pranayamais the exthe consuming/consumedreversibilemplar,takes this one step further.It illustrates ity and also focuses on the inside/outsideambiguitypresent in his works. It is in that we find the full expressionof this reversibility, an understanding of pranayama the unity of the senses, and the capacity of 'perceiving'the inner body through breathingtechniques. Even before we can reflecton eating we are alreadydrawn into the reversibility of consumptionthroughour acts of breathing. At a fundamental level breathingis consumption-not merely consumptionof air as 'matter'but as element in the way Merleau-Ponty understands flesh. Breathing is the firstexample of the consumptionof flesh. The expelled breathfromthe body is the inhaledbreath of the world-the body breathesthe worldas the worldbreathesthe body.They are both implicated in a reversiblerelationof consumption.This process is not mere 'transference' but belongs to reversibility because of the possibilityof the perception of inner body throughbreathingtechniques. And once the innerbody is perceived throughbreathing,then breathingis no longer merely a biological act but belongs properlyto the domain of perception. and perceptionare linked in a fundamentalway as is easily seen in Breathing the modalitiesin which perceptiongets modified, as in times of emotional distress when one feels anger, joy, and so on. The perceptualexperience in these states is significantlydifferentwhen compared to 'normal'states. In moments of anger, for example, one's breathingis very differentin comparisonto the normal state. conBreathingand health are also co-constitutiveof each other.67The interesting of the complex nection between breathingand speech is yet anothermanifestation phenomenologicalconsequences of breathing.68 The practicesof yoga asanas and pranayamahave many consequences. They make possible a richer phenomenological descriptionof the effects of breathing, of controlling inhalation,exhalation, and retentionof breath, due to which there is heightened sense experience, willful control over inner body capacities, and, in

474

PhilosophyEast& West

general, new experiences of the innerbody. These cannot be explained by the bioalone. So also, the yogic discoursein its ideal to logical model of body and breathing transcendthe body in orderto achieve liberationcannot be of much help in understandingthe phenomenological implicationsof its practices.What is needed, then, is a fresh interpretation of the notion of inside and outside that is modeled on the perception and experience of the inner body. I have suggested earlierthat understanding'inside' as the phenomenologicalexperience of dimensionalityis one such model. I began by showing that Merleau-Pontyuses inside/outside in an ambiguous manner.The absence of the idea of inner body in his philosophy compounds this confusion. Yoga is most definitelya philosophyand practiceof the 'inner'.I hope to have shown that the 'inner'phenomenology of yoga and Merleau-Ponty's philosophy complementeach other perfectly. Notes This work was supportedin part by the Homi Bhabha Fellowship. I am gratefulto Michael Weinstein for a critical readingof the manuscriptand for his comments. Discussions with James Morley in the initialstages of readingMerleau-Ponty were I and thank him for that. Dhanwanti me much about useful, Nayaktaught yoga, for which I am indebted. Partof this work was completed while I was a Fellow at the Indian Instituteof Advanced Studies, Shimla. The support of that Fellowship is gratefullyacknowledged. I also thank G. C. Pande for clarifyingsome important points on the idea of inner in yoga. 1 - M. Merleau-Ponty, The Visibleand the Invisible,trans.Alphonso Lingis(Evanston: Northwestern UniversityPress,1968).
2 - Ibid., p. 138. 3 - Ibid., p. 132.

4- Ibid.,p. 133.
5- Ibid., p. 134.

6- Ibid.,p. 135.
7 - Ibid.

8- Ibid.,p. 135-136. 9 - Ibid.,p. 136 n. 10- Ibid.,p. 136.

11 - Ibid.

12 - C. Vasseleu, Textures of Light(Londonand New York:Routledge,1998), p. 60. 13 - Merleau-Ponty, The Visibleand the Invisible,p. 148.

SundarSarukkai

475

14-

Ibid.

15- Ibid.,p. 261.

16 - Ibid., p. 262. 17Ibid., p. 257. 18 - Ibid., p. 264.

19 - Ibid.,p. 259.
20 - Ibid., p. 265.

21 - D. Olkowski, "TheContinuumof Interiority in the Thoughtof and Exteriority in D. Olkowski and J. eds., Merleau-Ponty," Morley, Merleau-Ponty, Interiority and Exteriority, Psychic Lifeand the World(Albany:State Universityof New YorkPress,1999), p. 1. 22 - GalenJohnson,"Insideand Outside,"in Olkowskiand Morley,Merleau-Ponty, and Exteriority, of the idea of inner(as thought, Interiority p. 29. Fora treatment rather than in psyche, 'body') building Wittgenstein,see PaulJohnston,Wittthe Inner(Londonand New York:Routledge,1993). genstein: Rethinking 23 - Schneider,who suffereda head injurydue to a splinterfrom a shell, suffered from many mental disorders. Merleau-Pontyused these disorders as case studies to argue that these disorderscould not be described completely by either the empiricistor intellectualistviews, and he developed a philosophy that is in between these positions. 24 - Merleau-Ponty, The Visibleand the Invisible,p. 265. 25 - Edward Casey, "The Element of Voluminousness: Depth and Place Reed. M. C. Dillon (Albany: StateUniversity Vivant, examined,"in Merleau-Ponty of New YorkPress,1991). 26- Ibid.,p. 10. 27 - M. C. Dillon, Merleau-Ponty'sOntology (Bloomington and Indianapolis: IndianaUniversityPress,1988), p. 167. 28 - S. C. Banerji,Studies in Origin and Development of Yoga(Calcutta:Punthi Pustak,1995).
29 - Ibid., p. 44.

30- Ibid.,p. 1.
31 - Ibid.

32-J.

of Patafjali (1914; Delhi: Motilal BanaraH. Woods, The Yoga-System sidas, 1983). The second sutraof Book I in the Yogasutra says yoga is cittavrttinirodha.

33 - J. R. Ballantyneand G. S. Shastri,Yogasutrasof Patafnjali(Delhi: Akay Book 1980), p. 10. Corporation,

476

PhilosophyEast& West

of Patanijali, 34 - Woods, The Yoga-System p. 6. 35 - To list them: the organs of sense are the eye, ear, skin, nose, and tongue; the organs of action are the organ of speech, the hand, foot, anus, and genitals. This is the listingof the eleven Indriyas, the eleventh being mind, as listed in of Samkhya-Pravachana-Sutram. Butfurther sutra11.19 on, mind as the internal into three divisions. Thus is itself subdivided 11.38 sutra says thatthere are organ of which ten 'external' are the thirteeninstruments (karana) organsof sense and action and three 'internal'are associated with the mental (buddhi,ahamkara, and manas). See the SamkhyaPhilosophy,trans. N. Sinha (1915; Delhi: Oriental Books, 1979), pp. 252, 270. of Patahjali, 36 - Ballantyneand Shastri,Yogasutras p. 11. of Patanjali,p. 191; Ballantyneand Shastri,Yogasu37 - Woods, The Yoga-System trasof Patafjali,p. 64. 38 - Ballantyneand Shastri,Yogasutras of Patanijali, p. 64. 39 - Woods, The Yoga-System of Patanjali, p. 194. 40 - See also T. Leggett,The CompleteCommentary by Sarkaraon the YogaSutras and New York: 276. (London KeganPaul, 1990), p. 41 - Samyamais a technical name for the triad of concentration,meditation,and See Leggett, samadhi (the last three aids of yoga) and is described in YS111.4. TheCompleteCommentary by Sankara, p. 284.
42 - Ibid., p. 335.

43 - For example, see D. M. Levin, ed., Modernityand the Hegemony of Vision (Berkeley:Universityof CaliforniaPress, 1993). For a discussion of MerleauPonty's engagement with metaphorsof vision see M. Jay's piece in Levin's book. 44 - N. Sinha, TheSamkhyaPhilosophy,p. xi. 45 - Ibid., p. 283. See also the Samkhya-Karika of Isvarakrisna for similardiscussions on the subtle and gross body.
46 - Ibid., p. 285.

47 - Ibid.,p. 288; sutraI1.11. 48 - Banerji,Studiesin Originand Developmentof Yoga,p. 275.

49 - Ibid., p. 229. 50 - Ibid., p. 249. 51 - Ibid., p. 351.

52 - B.K.S. lyengar, Light on Yoga (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1968), p. 242.

Sundar Sarukkai 477

53 - Ibid., pp. 80-81. 54 - Ibid., p. 88. 55 - Ibid., p. 106. 56Ibid., p. 241.

57 - Ibid., p. 253. Mircea Eliade discusses breath control and other respiratory the practicesassociated with Taoism. In the case of "embryonicrespiration," Taoistsbelieve that the 'place' of each breathis the "internal organthat correto each breath." and Freedom, See Mircea Eliade, sponds Yoga:Immortality trans.WillardTrask(New York:PantheonBooks, 1958), p. 60. 58 - Banerji,Studiesin Originand Developmentof Yoga,p. 357. 11.49. 59 - Ibid.,p. 243; Hathayoga-PradTpika 60 - Eliadedoes point out certainsimilaritiesbetween pranayama and the respiraof monks. and FreeSee Eliade, tory practices Hesychastic Yoga:Immortality I in 63. am sure there are other monastic communities the West that dom, p. have But it can be had or continue to have such may practices. arguedthat modernismin the West shiftedthe body discourse into dominantlythat of the scientificone, a move that inevitablydistancedthe body from its phenomenological descriptions. The Visibleand the Invisible,p. 155. 61 - Merleau-Ponty, in Olkowskiand Morley,Merleau-Ponty, 62 - LawrenceHass, "Senseand Alterity," 91. and Interiority Exteriority, p. 63 - Dillon, Merleau-Ponty's Ontology,p. 170. 64 - See Merleau-Ponty,Phenomenologyof Perception,trans. Colin Smith (New York:HumanitiesPress,1962). See also Dillon, Merleau-Ponty's Ontology. The Visibleand the Invisible,p. 139. 65 - Merleau-Ponty, 66 - This is not to mistake the flesh as corporeal. Even as an element of being, consumptionbecomes the underlyingnorm. the tantric, 67 - There is also this interestingbelief within the yogic, particularly traditionthat the healthof a person can be gauged by the amountof time one breathesthroughthe left or rightnostril.An imbalance in this is relatedto the Secret level of illness of the person. See, for example, Swami Sivapriyananda, Abhinav Delhi: Powerof Tantrik 1983). (New Publications, Breathing 68 - There is also a fascinating insight into breathing and its connection with speech, namely, when one is breathing,he/she cannot speak. Thus, there is always a sacrificeof speech while breathingand vice versa. I do not want to speculate on the implicationsof this here but merely point out that the complexityof breathingmanifestsitselfphenomenologicallyin diverseways!

478

PhilosophyEast& West