Yes, we should celebrate yoga – but not for the reason Modi and his admirers want us to

Yoga didn’t emerge from a homogenous Hindu culture, nor did it ever have fixed metaphysical goals.

In September 2014, fresh after his win in the Indian general elections, Prime Minister Narendra Modi stood before the UN General Assembly and made an impassioned call for a day to celebrate yoga globally. The request was answered, with broad support. In December, June 21 was declared International Day of Yoga, and since, several elaborate yoga day events have been held in close to 200 countries.

Many saw the UN declaration as a move by a Hindu nationalist leader to deploy yoga on the world stage as part of a strategy to promote a cultural mono-narrative favouring a Hindu supremacist agenda. In India, the critics believed, participation would be seen as a yardstick of patriotism, and any opposition deemed anti-national.

Subsequent pronouncements by Modi’s allies or appointees have seemed to confirm the suspicions. Yogi Adityanath, now the chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, said that those who refuse to perform the sun salutations known as Surya Namaskar are traitors who ought to drown themselves in the ocean or leave the country. Baba Ramdev, a popular yoga teacher and businessman with a following in the tens of millions, repeated his claim that yoga can be used to cure homosexuality. And what is one to make of Sri Sri Ravi Shankar’s statement in April that regular yoga practice could prevent debt-ridden Indian farmers from committing suicide?

Both Ramdev and Ravi Shankar are featured on an Indian website dedicated to the International Day of Yoga as paragons of yogic virtue. The site also informs us that Patanjali, the “father of yoga”, defines it “as Yoga Chitta Vritti Nirodha – yoga is the cessation of mental fluctuations. Hence, yoga can be defined as a state of complete stillness of mind. To achieve this goal, Patanjali prescribes the eight limbs or stages every practitioner must master”.

This is the popular view propagated of yoga. Contrary to it, Patanjali has not been the gold standard or the definitive guide for yogis down the ages.

Sankara’s Bṛhadāraṇyakopaniṣadbhāṣya (a commentary on the Brhadaranyaka Upanishad by Adi Shankaracharya) says, “Pātañjala yoga is not a means to liberation: And so should suppression of the fluctuations of the mind be practiced?… No, because it is not considered a means to liberation.”

In the 18th century text Haṃsavilāsa, Haṃsamiṭṭhu tells his wife and Yogini Haṃsi: “Dear lady, Patañjali’s teaching is nonsense, because there is nothing agreeable in anything achieved by force.” The text continues: “The glorious rājayoga is attained by the vital principle spontaneously, without forceful methods. There is no point in these extreme exertions…. As a result the teachings of Patañjali are not included among true teachings.”

Yoga scholars James Mallinson and Mark Singleton have translated a number of rare texts tracing yoga back to its roots in hoary antiquity. Their findings, recently published in the Roots of Yoga, upend many commonly held views on the origins and philosophy of yoga. It confirms that the glorious Indian tradition of argumentation and dissent was alive and well, most notably in matters of religion. No doctrine was too sacred and no master beyond critique. There were many who thought Hatha Yoga was a waste of time or simply avoidable.

Roots of Yoga, by James Mallinson and Mark Singleton.
Roots of Yoga, by James Mallinson and Mark Singleton.

Case in point is the Mahākālasaṃhitā Guhyakālīkhaṇḍa, a medieval text which was explicit about its disenchantment with conventional yogic wisdom. It said: “Many Brahman sages of old died through haṭhayoga, so nowadays one should never practise haṭhayoga. Many diseases arise through the retention and inhalation of air, my dear. People die suddenly from them, so one should shun haṭhayoga.”

The 12th century Amanaska treatise tells us not to waste our time with elaborate mantras, complicated breathing techniques, visualising chakras or bodily contortions since they are all constructs of the mind which must be discarded to arrive at “no-mind”. “Some are intent upon mantrayoga, some deluded by meditation, [and] some torment themselves with [the practice of] haṭha… All the various locks and seals of [haṭha] practice produce only the yoga of ignorance. Meditation on the bodily centres, the channels and the six supports (ādhāra) is delusion of the mind. Therefore you must abandon all that, which is created by the mind, and embrace the no-mind [state] (amanaska).”

There is a conspicuous absence of women practitioners from premodern yoga texts, which were all authored by men. Medieval hatha texts commonly insist that male yogis should avoid the company of women, offering the rationale that close contact with the opposite sex could result in the loss of bindu or semen, a precious fluid that needs to be preserved at all costs for its vital role in attaining elevated states of consciousness. However, women were to be sought out for their menstrual fluid used in certain rites.

The misogynistic pronouncements made in these texts are echoed by Yogi Adityanath, who thinks the primary role of a woman is to be a wife or a mother, and is firmly against “western feminism” because it will “hamper the creation and stability of the home and the family. These regressive sentiments are not likely to find favour with contemporary transnational yoga culture, dominated as it is by independent women, staunchly opposed to oppressive patriarchal systems.

A few years prior to the UN declaration, the Hindu American Foundation, which seeks to shape the image of Hinduism in the US, launched their Take Back Yoga campaign, a phrase that might seem self-explanatory to some and puzzling to others.

The HAF laments that the yoga taught at modern studios had been disconnected “from the Hinduism that gave forth this immense contribution to humanity”, the lifelong practice of which, in HAF’s view, led one to moksha, or union with Brahman. Its co-founder, Aseem Shukla, told The New York Times, “Our issue is that yoga has thrived, but Hinduism has lost control of the brand.”

Andrea Jain is a scholar of South Asian religious traditions, who has explored the phenomenon of transnational yoga in her book Selling Yoga: From Counterculture to Pop Culture. In an email exchange, she disputed the HAF’s definition of yoga: “The HAF offers just one more inaccurate, homogenising vision of yoga and Hinduism based on revisionist historical accounts. Representatives of the HAF argue that authentic yoga is raja yoga as found in Patanjali’s Yoga Sutras with its eight limbs, of which posture is only one…

“Yet, as noted in Selling Yoga and many other recent historical studies, for at least two thousand years in South Asia, people from various ideological and practical religious cultures invented and reinvented yoga in their own images. Furthermore, the interreligious and intercultural exchanges – primarily among Hindu, Buddhist, and Jain traditions – throughout the history of yoga in South Asia problematise the identification of yoga as Hindu.”

International Day of Yoga is certainly a boost for the popularity of this ancient and effective practice, which is of tremendous benefit to millions of practitioners the world over. But it is necessary to acknowledge that it has not emerged from a homogenous culture with fixed metaphysical goals, and does not have an overarching narrative common to all its practitioners down the ages. Yoga evolves and adapts to the socio-political and cultural context in which it finds itself. It has always been, and remains, a personal and individualistic practice, the meaning and benefits of which can only be determined by the practitioner as she progresses along the path.

Which is surely more than enough reason to celebrate it.

Vikram Zutshi is a Los Angeles-based writer and filmmaker. His Twitter handle is @getafix2012.

We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content BY 

Behind the garb of wealth and success, white collar criminals are hiding in plain sight

Understanding the forces that motivate leaders to become fraudsters.

Most con artists are very easy to like; the ones that belong to the corporate society, even more so. The Jordan Belforts of the world are confident, sharp and can smooth-talk their way into convincing people to bend at their will. For years, Harshad Mehta, a practiced con-artist, employed all-of-the-above to earn the sobriquet “big bull” on Dalaal Street. In 1992, the stockbroker used the pump and dump technique, explained later, to falsely inflate the Sensex from 1,194 points to 4,467. It was only after the scam that journalist Sucheta Dalal, acting on a tip-off, broke the story exposing how he fraudulently dipped into the banking system to finance a boom that manipulated the stock market.


In her book ‘The confidence game’, Maria Konnikova observes that con artists are expert storytellers - “When a story is plausible, we often assume it’s true.” Harshad Mehta’s story was an endearing rags-to-riches tale in which an insurance agent turned stockbroker flourished based on his skill and knowledge of the market. For years, he gave hope to marketmen that they too could one day live in a 15,000 sq.ft. posh apartment with a swimming pool in upmarket Worli.

One such marketman was Ketan Parekh who took over Dalaal Street after the arrest of Harshad Mehta. Ketan Parekh kept a low profile and broke character only to celebrate milestones such as reaching Rs. 100 crore in net worth, for which he threw a lavish bash with a star-studded guest-list to show off his wealth and connections. Ketan Parekh, a trainee in Harshad Mehta’s company, used the same infamous pump-and-dump scheme to make his riches. In that, he first used false bank documents to buy high stakes in shares that would inflate the stock prices of certain companies. The rise in stock prices lured in other institutional investors, further increasing the price of the stock. Once the price was high, Ketan dumped these stocks making huge profits and causing the stock market to take a tumble since it was propped up on misleading share prices. Ketan Parekh was later implicated in the 2001 securities scam and is serving a 14-years SEBI ban. The tactics employed by Harshad Mehta and Ketan Parekh were similar, in that they found a loophole in the system and took advantage of it to accumulate an obscene amount of wealth.


Call it greed, addiction or smarts, the 1992 and 2001 Securities Scams, for the first time, revealed the magnitude of white collar crimes in India. To fill the gaps exposed through these scams, the Securities Laws Act 1995 widened SEBI’s jurisdiction and allowed it to regulate depositories, FIIs, venture capital funds and credit-rating agencies. SEBI further received greater autonomy to penalise capital market violations with a fine of Rs 10 lakhs.

Despite an empowered regulatory body, the next white-collar crime struck India’s capital market with a massive blow. In a confession letter, Ramalinga Raju, ex-chairman of Satyam Computers convicted of criminal conspiracy and financial fraud, disclosed that Satyam’s balance sheets were cooked up to show an excess of revenues amounting to Rs. 7,000 crore. This accounting fraud allowed the chairman to keep the share prices of the company high. The deception, once revealed to unsuspecting board members and shareholders, made the company’s stock prices crash, with the investors losing as much as Rs. 14,000 crores. The crash of India’s fourth largest software services company is often likened to the bankruptcy of Enron - both companies achieved dizzying heights but collapsed to the ground taking their shareholders with them. Ramalinga Raju wrote in his letter “it was like riding a tiger, not knowing how to get off without being eaten”, implying that even after the realisation of consequences of the crime, it was impossible for him to rectify it.

It is theorised that white-collar crimes like these are highly rationalised. The motivation for the crime can be linked to the strain theory developed by Robert K Merton who stated that society puts pressure on individuals to achieve socially accepted goals (the importance of money, social status etc.). Not having the means to achieve those goals leads individuals to commit crimes.

Take the case of the executive who spent nine years in McKinsey as managing director and thereafter on the corporate and non-profit boards of Goldman Sachs, Procter & Gamble, American Airlines, and Harvard Business School. Rajat Gupta was a figure of success. Furthermore, his commitment to philanthropy added an additional layer of credibility to his image. He created the American India Foundation which brought in millions of dollars in philanthropic contributions from NRIs to development programs across the country. Rajat Gupta’s descent started during the investigation on Raj Rajaratnam, a Sri-Lankan hedge fund manager accused of insider trading. Convicted for leaking confidential information about Warren Buffet’s sizeable investment plans for Goldman Sachs to Raj Rajaratnam, Rajat Gupta was found guilty of conspiracy and three counts of securities fraud. Safe to say, Mr. Gupta’s philanthropic work did not sway the jury.


The people discussed above have one thing in common - each one of them was well respected and celebrated for their industry prowess and social standing, but got sucked down a path of non-violent crime. The question remains - Why are individuals at successful positions willing to risk it all? The book Why They Do It: Inside the mind of the White-Collar Criminal based on a research by Eugene Soltes reveals a startling insight. Soltes spoke to fifty white collar criminals to understand their motivations behind the crimes. Like most of us, Soltes expected the workings of a calculated and greedy mind behind the crimes, something that could separate them from regular people. However, the results were surprisingly unnerving. According to the research, most of the executives who committed crimes made decisions the way we all do–on the basis of their intuitions and gut feelings. They often didn’t realise the consequences of their action and got caught in the flow of making more money.


The arena of white collar crimes is full of commanding players with large and complex personalities. Billions, starring Damien Lewis and Paul Giamatti, captures the undercurrents of Wall Street and delivers a high-octane ‘ruthless attorney vs wealthy kingpin’ drama. The show looks at the fine line between success and fraud in the stock market. Bobby Axelrod, the hedge fund kingpin, skilfully walks on this fine line like a tightrope walker, making it difficult for Chuck Rhoades, a US attorney, to build a case against him.

If financial drama is your thing, then block your weekend for Billions. You can catch it on Hotstar Premium, a platform that offers a wide collection of popular and Emmy-winning shows such as Game of Thrones, Modern Family and This Is Us, in addition to live sports coverage, and movies. To subscribe, click here.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of Hotstar and not by the Scroll editorial team.