The Four Yogas Compared
Why there is more than one path — what “yoga” means, where the famous four paths come from, and the old argument about which of them actually sets you free.
Ask a teacher “What should I do?” and a good one will first ask, “Who are you?” The tradition has never offered one practice for everyone. Some people are moved to serve, some to love, some to understand, some to sit still and look within. Over the last century these have been gathered into a neat picture of four yogas — the paths of action, devotion, knowledge and meditation. This page opens the Paths of Yoga section: it explains the word, shows where the fourfold scheme really comes from, compares the four side by side, and stages the classical debate about which path is the one that liberates.
Yoking, union, discipline
The word yoga comes from the root yuj, “to yoke” — the same root as English yoke and Latin iungere, “to join.” In the Ṛg Veda one yokes horses to a chariot. From that simple picture the word grew several meanings, and much confusion comes from mixing them up:
युज्Harnessingyoking the senses and mind
The oldest sense. The Kaṭha Upaniṣad pictures the self riding in the chariot of the body, with the senses as horses and the mind as reins; yoga is the firm holding of the senses, like a driver keeping restless horses in check.
उपायMethoda way of practice
A “yoga” can simply mean a disciplined means to an end. This is why the Gītā can speak of karma-yoga and jñāna-yoga: the discipline of action, the discipline of knowledge. In this sense there are as many yogas as there are serious ways of practising.
समाधिConcentrationPatañjali’s sense
Sanskrit grammarians list a second root yuj, meaning “to concentrate.” The commentator Vyāsa opens his explanation of the Yoga Sūtra with “yoga is samādhi.” Here yoga is not joining at all, but the stilling of the mind — see Yoga as Philosophy.
ऐक्यUniona Vedāntic and devotional reading
The popular translation “union with God” fits the Vedānta and bhakti traditions, where the soul is joined to — or discovers its oneness with — the divine. It does not fit Patañjali, whose goal is the separation of pure consciousness from nature (kaivalya).
The Gītā itself gives three short definitions, each worth a lifetime: “evenness of mind is called yoga” (2.48), “yoga is skill in action” (2.50), and
The play on words is deliberate: yoga is the yoke that unyokes us from suffering.
Where the four come from
It is natural to assume the four paths are an ancient list. They are not quite. The Gītā speaks of many yogas, and in one place says plainly that it knows two great ways:
ज्ञानयोगेन साङ्ख्यानां कर्मयोगेन योगिनाम् ॥ loke ’smin dvi-vidhā niṣṭhā purā proktā mayānagha,
jñāna-yogena sāṅkhyānāṃ karma-yogena yoginām In this world, sinless one, I taught long ago a twofold path: the yoga of knowledge for the contemplatives, and the yoga of action for the people of action. Bhagavad Gītā 3.3
Elsewhere it lists several: some see the Self by meditation, others by the path of knowledge, others by the yoga of action, and still others, not knowing these, worship by hearing from others (13.24–25). And its chapter colophons call every chapter a yoga. On the Bhagavad Gita page you can see them all: chapter 3 is karma-yoga, chapter 4 joins knowledge and action, chapter 6 is dhyāna-yoga, the yoga of meditation, and chapter 12 is bhakti-yoga.
Modern reading The tidy scheme of exactly four paths was popularised by Swami Vivekananda. His lectures in America and England in 1895–96 became four short books, Karma-Yoga, Bhakti-Yoga, Rāja-Yoga and Jñāna-Yoga, published in the late 1890s. He matched them to four kinds of people — the active, the emotional, the mystical and the philosophical — and taught that every religion, rightly practised, is a combination of them. The scheme draws on real classical material, but its shape is his. In particular, “Rāja-yoga” as a name for Patañjali’s system is largely his usage: in medieval haṭha-yoga texts, rāja-yoga mostly meant the goal of practice, the royal state of absorption, rather than a separate path.
The four, side by side
Seeker’s synthesis A simple way to remember them: hand, heart, head and will. Choose a path to see its method, the faculty it trains, its typical trap, and one or two people who walked it.
Karma yoga — the hand
Method: doing one’s work and duty fully, as an offering, without clinging to its results.
Faculty: the will to act; the body in service.
Trap: busy-ness without inner change; quietly keeping score of one’s good deeds.
Exemplars: King Janaka, praised in the Gītā (3.20) for reaching perfection through action; in modern times, Gandhi.
Bhakti yoga — the heart
Method: loving God — hearing, singing, remembering, serving, surrendering.
Faculty: feeling and love, turned towards the divine.
Trap: sentimentality, or pride in one’s own deity and sect.
Exemplars: Prahlāda; the Tamil saints Āṇṭāḷ and Kāraikkāl Ammaiyār; Mīrābāī.
Jñāna yoga — the head
Method: hearing the teaching, reflecting on it and contemplating it until the truth of the Self is directly known.
Faculty: discrimination (viveka) between the real and the passing.
Trap: mistaking learning and clever talk for realisation.
Exemplars: Maitreyī, who asked Yājñavalkya for what makes one immortal; Shankara; in modern times, Ramana Maharshi.
Rāja yoga — the will turned inward
Method: ethical discipline, posture, breath, withdrawal of the senses, concentration and meditation, as set out in the Yoga Sūtra.
Faculty: attention.
Trap: chasing experiences or powers; rigid self-control without kindness.
Exemplars: Patañjali, the compiler of the system; the Tamil siddha Tirumūlar, whose Tirumantiram also teaches the eight limbs.
Two pages go deeper into Patañjali’s practice — The Eight Limbs and Yamas & Niyamas — and one is purely practical: Meditation. Every path, the tradition agrees, is best walked with a teacher.
Which path liberates?
For the classical commentators, “which path suits me?” was a lesser question than “which path actually brings mokṣa?” Each school answered from its own understanding of what bondage is. Take each position in turn:
Action, devotion or knowledge?
The Gītā praises all three. Is one of them the real means of freedom — or do they work only together?
Shankara’s case
Advaita view Bondage is ignorance — taking the rope for a snake. No amount of action removes a mistake; only seeing does. Action done without selfishness, and devotion, are precious because they purify the mind (citta-śuddhi) and make it fit for knowledge, but they cannot produce knowledge, because the Self is already what it is. Liberation is by knowledge alone (see Advaita Vedanta).
The weak point
Critics say this makes action and love merely a ladder to be kicked away — and that the Gītā ends not with “know” but with “take refuge in me.”
Ramanuja’s case
Viśiṣṭādvaita view Bondage is the soul’s forgetting that it belongs to God. Karma yoga and jñāna yoga lead to a vision of one’s own self as distinct from the body; that prepares the ground for bhakti, unbroken loving meditation on the Lord, which is the direct means — and the Lord’s grace completes it. His tradition adds prapatti, surrender, as a way open to all (see Vishishtadvaita).
The weak point
Advaitins reply that love still assumes a lover and a beloved — two — and so cannot be the last word on a reality that is one.
The combination view
Bhedābheda view Bhāskara and others held samuccaya, “combination”: knowledge and prescribed action must be practised together, like two wings of a bird. The Veda commands both; why would it command what does not help towards freedom?
The weak point
Shankara argued at length against this: light and darkness do not cooperate. If knowledge already removes ignorance, action adds nothing to the result — though it may still be done for the world’s sake.
Tilak’s case
Modern reading In his Gītā Rahasya (1915), Bal Gangadhar Tilak argued that Krishna’s purpose was to get Arjuna to act. Knowledge and devotion are presupposed, but the Gītā’s distinctive message is energetic, selfless action in the world — not renunciation.
The weak point
The classical commentators would say this reads a modern political need into the text, and ignores the Gītā’s many verses praising the renouncer and the knower.
So who is right?
The text itself is generous enough to support each reading, which is why the argument has never ended. Madhva added a further voice: devotion grounded in right knowledge, and above all God’s grace (see Dvaita). Notice that almost no one says the other paths are worthless. The disagreement is about which is the direct cause of freedom and which are its supports.
- Shaiva Siddhanta teaches four ascending stages — caryā (temple service), kriyā (ritual worship), yoga (meditation) and jñāna (knowledge) — in which knowledge is the crown, but only by Shiva’s grace (aruḷ). See Shaiva Siddhanta.
- Patañjali’s Yoga already blends the paths in its “yoga of action” (Yoga Sūtra 2.1): austerity, self-study and devotion to the Lord. See Yoga as Philosophy.
- Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavas see pure devotion not as a means at all but as the goal itself, higher than liberation.
- Śākta and Kashmir Śaiva (Tantric) traditions see liberation as recognising oneself as Śiva–Śakti, reached through mantra, the awakening of kuṇḍalinī and, above all, grace (śaktipāta); Abhinavagupta read the Gītā in this light. See Kashmir Shaivism.
Most people walk a blend
In real life, the four are rarely separate. A grandmother who cooks for the temple festival, sings Tēvāram as she works, listens to a discourse on the Gītā in the evening and sits quietly with her prayer beads before sleep is walking all four paths in a single day. Vivekananda himself held up as his ideal a person in whom all four were harmoniously developed, not one at the expense of the rest. The question is not which box you belong in, but which door is most open to you now — and the doors lead into one house.
The tradition also warns against using the scheme as an excuse. The person of action still needs to study; the scholar still needs humility and love; the devotee still needs to serve; the meditator still needs to be kind to the people in the next room.
For one day, notice which of the four comes naturally to you. When you have a spare five minutes, do you want to do something useful, sing or pray, read and think, or sit quietly? Write the answer down in the reflection box below. Tomorrow, spend five minutes on the one that comes least naturally — and see what it teaches you.
If you would like a more structured reflection, try Which Path Suits Me?
Check your knowledge:
Who popularised the scheme of exactly four yogas?
Vivekananda, in lectures of the 1890s. The Gītā itself speaks of several yogas, and in 3.3 of two.
Which chapter of the Gītā is titled the yoga of devotion?
Chapter 12, Bhakti-yoga. Chapter 3 is action, chapter 6 meditation.
For Shankara, selfless action…
It prepares the mind; knowledge alone removes ignorance.
“Samuccaya” means…
The view that knowledge and action must be combined — argued by Bhāskara, rejected by Shankara.
Questions people often ask
Is “yoga” the same as the postures I do at the gym?
Postures (āsana) are one limb of one path. Modern postural yoga grew largely from medieval haṭha yoga and 20th-century teachers. It can be a fine doorway, but the classical word is far larger. See The Sutras on classical and modern yoga.
Do I have to choose one path?
No. Most teachers recommend leaning into the path that suits you while keeping something of the others. Even Shankara, the great champion of knowledge, wrote hymns of devotion, and Ramanuja, the champion of devotion, wrote demanding philosophy.
Are the paths open to everyone?
Not always, classically. Formal Vedic study and renunciation were long restricted by caste and gender, which shaped who could walk the path of knowledge in its traditional form. The bhakti movements were the great opening, and modern teachers have opened every path to all. It is better to say this plainly than to pretend otherwise.
॥ Pause and reflect
- Hand, heart, head, will: which do you trust most? Which do you neglect?
- The Gītā calls yoga “the unyoking from sorrow.” What sorrow would you most like to be unyoked from?
- In the debate above, whose answer did you instinctively agree with? Why?
Your notes are saved privately in this browser.
Key terms on this page
Sources & further reading
- Bhagavad Gītā 2.48, 2.50, 3.3, 6.23, 13.24–25 — Winthrop Sargeant (trans.), The Bhagavad Gītā (SUNY Press, 1984; 2009), gives the Sanskrit word by word.
- Swami Vivekananda, Karma-Yoga, Bhakti-Yoga, Rāja-Yoga and Jñāna-Yoga, in The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda (Advaita Ashrama).
- Arvind Sharma, The Hindu Gītā: Ancient and Classical Interpretations of the Bhagavadgītā (Duckworth, 1986) — on Shankara, Ramanuja, Bhāskara and others.
- Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Śrīmad Bhagavadgītā Rahasya (1915).
- Gavin Flood, An Introduction to Hinduism (Cambridge University Press, 1996).
- Elizabeth De Michelis, A History of Modern Yoga: Patañjali and Western Esotericism (Continuum, 2004) — on Vivekananda’s Rāja-Yoga.