OMJOOMSUH Wiki

Guna

8 min read

Guna

What it is

A guna is one of the three strands out of which everything material is woven. Samkhya holds that Prakriti, nature, is constituted of exactly three: sattva, rajas and tamas. Every object, every body, every mood, every meal and every thought carries all three at once, in some proportion, and what distinguishes one state from another is the ratio rather than the presence of any one strand.

This page is the parent of the three that follow it. Sattva, rajas and tamas each have their own page on this wiki; what they share is this structure, and the structure is where most of the misunderstanding happens.

The two errors worth naming at the start. The gunas are not three types of person, and a great deal of popular writing treats them that way. They are three components present in everyone at every moment. And they are not good, neutral and bad. Sattva is the condition in which the other two can be worked with, which makes it useful for practice, and a life composed only of sattva would accomplish nothing, since rajas is what moves and tamas is what rests and consolidates.

Sanskrit and etymology

Guṇa (गुण) has a cluster of meanings in Sanskrit that all bear on how the word works here.

Its oldest sense is a strand, thread or cord. A rope is made of strands twisted together, and no strand is the rope. This is the image the system is built on: the three are not ingredients mixed in a bowl but fibres wound into a single cord, inseparable in the finished thing.

It also means quality or attribute, which is the sense that usually reaches English, and a multiplier, as in “threefold”.

There is a fourth resonance the tradition uses deliberately. A cord binds. The Bhagavad Gita devotes its fourteenth chapter to exactly this reading, describing each of the three as fastening the embodied one in a different way.

What the Samkhya Karika says

The technical definition sits in two verses of the Samkhya Karika.1

Verse 12 gives each guna a felt character and a function. Sattva has the nature of prīti, satisfaction or pleasantness. Rajas has the nature of aprīti, unpleasantness. Tamas has the nature of viṣāda, dejection or heaviness. Their functions are to illuminate, to activate and to restrain. The verse then states that the three mutually dominate, support, produce and accompany one another.

That last clause is the difficult and important part. The three are opposed in nature and cooperative in operation. They take turns dominating. None operates alone.

Verse 13 gives the physical characteristics. Sattva is laghu, light in weight, and prakāśaka, illuminating. Rajas is upaṣṭambhaka, stimulating or urging, and cala, mobile. Tamas is guru, heavy, and varaṇaka, enveloping or obstructing.

The verse closes with the image the tradition has never improved on: they work together for a purpose pradīpavat, in the manner of a lamp.2 A lamp is wick, oil and flame. The three have nothing in common and would each undo the others if you considered them separately. Together they are the only reason there is light in the room.

In the unmanifest state the three sit in equilibrium, and that equilibrium is what Prakriti is before anything appears. Manifestation begins when the balance is disturbed. Everything on the twenty-five-tattva list from mahat downward is a consequence of that disturbance.

Where it appears in the canon

Bhagavad Gita, chapter fourteen, titled Guṇa Traya Vibhāga Yoga, is the fullest treatment in the devotional literature. It states that the three arise from prakriti and bind the imperishable dweller in the body, then takes each in turn: sattva binds through attachment to happiness and to knowledge, rajas through attachment to action, tamas through negligence and sleep. It closes with the trigunatita, the one who has passed beyond all three, described by how such a person behaves rather than by what they have attained.

Chapter seventeen applies the scheme to shraddha, faith, and then to four ordinary things: food, sacrifice, austerity and giving. The food verses, 17.8 to 17.10, are the ones most quoted and most flattened in modern wellness writing.3 The text describes sattvic food as increasing vitality and health and being agreeable; rajasic food as sharp, sour, salty and burning, producing pain and disease; and tamasic food as stale, insipid, putrid and left over.

Chapter eighteen extends the same threefold analysis to knowledge, action, the doer, intellect, firmness and happiness. By the end of the Gita the reader has been handed a single analytic tool and shown it applied to almost everything a person does.

In Ayurveda the three gunas are the manasika constitution, the mental one, and they are kept distinct from vata, pitta and kapha, which are the sharirika or bodily doshas. Conflating the two sets is a common modern error. A person has both, and they are different axes.

In the Bihar School of Yoga curriculum the gunas appear less as doctrine than as a working instrument, in the treatment of diet, of the timing of practice, of sleep, and of what the tradition calls the company one keeps.

What is contested

Whether the gunas can be measured is the open question, and it is the one that matters most for this work. Several research groups have built instruments for it, the best known being the Vedic Personality Inventory, and the attempt runs into a structural problem: a self-report questionnaire measures self-report, while the gunas are supposed to be constituents of a person rather than opinions a person holds about themselves. The HBSC inherits this difficulty directly.

Sattva is routinely over-recommended. A reading of this material that treats sattva as the goal and rajas and tamas as faults produces a person who cannot act and cannot rest, which the classical texts do not endorse. The Gita’s own position is that all three bind, sattva included, and that the aim is to pass beyond the set.

The dietary lists have hardened beyond what the texts support. Three verses of chapter seventeen describe qualities of food in general terms. The detailed modern lists naming specific vegetables as rajasic or tamasic come from later commentarial and sectarian traditions, and they differ from one another. Treating them as settled scripture overstates the source.

Why it matters

It is the mechanism under every recommendation this work makes about ordinary things. Sleep timing, meal composition, what is watched in the evening, who is in the room. Without the gunas, these are unrelated pieces of wellness advice. With them, they are inputs to one ratio, which is why the tradition treats the food and the practice and the company as a single subject.

It is the theory behind the Annamaya Index. The pillar the Index calls cooking wisdom is a guna claim: that the same ingredient, prepared differently, lands differently in a body. That is unremarkable inside this framework and unintelligible inside a calorie framework.

It explains why the practice is placed where it is. The tradition holds sattva to be most available in the pre-dawn hours, which is the reasoning behind Brahma Muhurta and behind a morning practice rather than an evening one.

It sets the ceiling on what a reading of a person can claim. If the gunas are constituents rather than categories, then any instrument that sorts people into three types has already misdescribed the thing it is measuring. A reading can honestly report a ratio at a moment. It cannot honestly report an identity.

Notes

Future work could pursue: whether the pradīpavat image in Karika 13 is doing more philosophical work than it is usually credited with, since a lamp is the standard Indian figure for cognition and the verse may be saying that the gunas exist in order to make experience possible rather than merely that they cooperate; a careful comparison of the manasika gunas against the sharirika doshas, which the HBSC needs and does not currently have a page for; the measurement problem named above, which deserves its own page rather than a paragraph; and the history of how the dietary lists hardened, which would let this wiki state plainly which parts come from the Gita and which from later tradition.

Terms used on this page that do not yet have pages of their own: Bhagavad Gita, Brahma Muhurta, Panch Mahabhutas. They are left unlinked deliberately, because the published folders render an unresolved link as a live 404.

Footnotes

  1. On Karika 12, the gunas as pleasure, pain and dejection, and as mutually dominating, supporting, productive and cooperative: “Samkhya Karika 12, Nature of Three Gunas”. https://www.shahzadpurfarmyoga.com/samkhyaphilosophy/sankhya-karika-12 ↩

  2. On Karika 13, sattva as laghu and prakāśaka, rajas as upaṣṭambhaka and cala, tamas as guru and varaṇaka, and the lamp of wick, oil and flame: “Samkhya Karika 13, The Purpose Three Gunas Come Together For”. https://www.shahzadpurfarmyoga.com/samkhyaphilosophy/sankhya-karika-13 ↩

  3. Bhagavad Gita 17.8 to 17.10 on the threefold division of food. Chapter 14, Guṇa Traya Vibhāga Yoga, on the three gunas as born of prakriti and as binding. https://www.holy-bhagavad-gita.org/chapter/14/ ↩

Graph View

Backlinks