What Is A Yoga Practice Anyway? Parts 1 & 2
This was originally posted to e-Sutra, the moderated world wide yoga e-mail discussion list, a few years ago. I wrote this in response to several different threads that had popped up at the time. Leslie Kaminoff has also recently created a blog version of e-Sutra. I would say that e-Sutra is worth checking out.
enjoy.
upsidedowncarl@yogascope.com
www.yogascope.com
========================
What is a Yoga Practice Anyway? Part 1
From: Carl Horowitz
It seems to me that there are a few separate threads going on that have some connection. Let’s see if we can put some of this together and create a new thread.
In the “Yoga By Colors” thread Eddie Stern made a very interesting point about how there is nothing wrong with giving practitioners some sense of achievement. He was not endorsing the belt system but acknowledging that creating a sense of purpose and accomplishment can motivate the practitioner and stimulate his/her interest. This is a very good point.
{{upsidedown editor's comment: in the e-Sutra "thread", "Yoga By Colors" the discussion was about a belt system that someone had come up with, similar to the belt system in Karate, to determine the level of the student. As you can imagine, the "Yoga By Colors" thread and the idea of students wearing belts to determine their state of "advancedness" caused a big response from the yoga community. :) Eddie was really the only person who was able to put his finger on a positive aspect of motivating students. And of course the guy who created the belt system that was being discussed had also determined that he, himself was a grand master and spiritually enlightened yoga practitioner and so, proclaimed himself as being the highest level of practitioner possible in his system! :) }}
However, finding the right tools to create a healthy sense of motivation can be more complicated than it may seem on the surface. Using the students desires to keep them interested and involved can sometimes become problematic. Here is the situation. You have four things that need to be balanced to help create an appropriate practice.
1) The interest of the student.
2) The desire of the student.
3) The abilities of the student.
4) And the needs of the student.
There is a relationship between interest and desire and a similar relationship between abilities and needs. If these four things are truly in balance practice will be interesting, fun, safe and effective.
However, if the interest and desire of the students are manipulated by a goal that is not in line with their needs and abilities then there will be problems. There will also be problems if the student’s desire creates an unhealthy attachment to the goals of practicing. This unhealthy type of attachment can often become an addiction. If you are addicted to your practice you may not be practicing the yoga that is right for you.
In “Yogis Behaving Badly” we can see that the intentions of the teacher are not always in line with the needs of the student.
In threads like “Is It An Opening/ Hiding Place,” and in Coeli’s article about Leslie Kaminoff and the yoga therapy work he is involved with, it is clear that there are people out there who are injuring themselves by practicing “yoga”.
If people are injuring themselves from practicing yoga then it is it is safe to say that their interests and desires are not being balanced appropriately with their needs and abilities.
And my questions for this thread are:
1) What is a yoga practice? What are the defining elements? What unifying principle can make asana, pranayama, visualization techniques, meditation, chanting and observance of yamas and niyamas all coherently be understood as different elements of one practice? Is there a unifying principle?
2) What kinds of benefits can you reasonably expect from a practice?
3) What are some of the things that are keeping people motivated to practice?
4) What kinds of things are people doing that they are injuring themselves?
Peace.
upsidedowncarl
================================
What Is A Yoga Practice Anyway? Part 2
From: Carl Horowitz
The answers to this thread have all been really good. But I guess I cannot resist making further comments because I am a silly person.
First: there is a difference between yoga and a yoga practice. The Yoga Sutras says that Yoga is a state where the activities of the mind have come to an end. Yoga can also be defined as connection, being linked to something, and therefore yoga can be defined as Relationship. And when you are in a state of relatedness to something or someone, when you are connected, the unnecessary activities of the mind cease and you merge with your experience.
Then what is a yoga practice? I like the simplicity with which Andrea stated it.
((…anything that you do regularly with enthusiasm that makes you feel good...))
That is pretty much it. But lets see if we lay this out in technical terms. Patanjali says: tapahsvadhyayesvarapranidhanani kriyayogah (Sutra 2.1). What does this mean? It means that the practice of yoga must contain these three things:
1) tapas: discipline that could create heat and will clear obstructions. This could simply be the discipline to bring yourself to a practice consistently as long as the practice helps create mental clarity or in other words as long as it makes things improve.
2) svadhyaya: self observation which leads to self awareness.
3) isvarapranidhana: this can mean many things: self surrender, surrender to god, reverence for a higher intelligence; or, for someone who does not believe in god, God or the gods it can be understood as: acceptance of our limitations and an understanding that there are things in the universe that are beyond our control. The concept conveys a quality of standing in awe before the mystery of life. The attitude expressed by isvarapranidhana is one of openness, availability, humility and gratitude.
Therefore, practicing yoga consists of discipline, self awareness and the understanding that there are things in the universe that are beyond your control.
These three things are the unifying principles that make it possible to understand all different aspects of yoga practice as part of one discipline. Whether you are chanting, meditating, doing an asana practice, a self purification ritual or doing good deeds, if it contains these three things at one and the same time it is a yoga practice.
Therefore, as Andrea said,
((It could be painting, gardening, playing with your children, loving your partner, doing yoga postures and breathing techniques.))
And Sutra 1.39 does say: yathabhimatadhyanadva which translates as: Any inquiry of interest can be used.
As Domagoj pointed out, self awareness is very important and in fact central to the process. My question now is, if a practice is truly based on discipline, self observation and acceptance of our limitations, then is it possible to injure yourself?
My personal understanding is that you can injure yourself trying to do someone else’s practice as Deborah put it. But I don’t think this is actually a yoga practice. To injure yourself there has to be a certain lack of self acceptance that would enable you to impose techniques that are inappropriate. You would have to be trying to force something on yourself while attempting to achieve something that is at least a little beyond your limits. This lack of self acceptance would indicate a lack of self awareness and it would also indicate a lack of isvarapranidhana in the practice. If you ignore where you actually are and impose your ideas of what you want on yourself then you are attempting to deny that there are things that are beyond your control. The concept of practice without attachment to the desired goals that Sutra 1.12 refers to is part of this concept of isvarapranidhana as well. And if you practice in this way then you will be safe and injury free.
It is not the exercises or techniques that make a practice yoga; it is tapahsvadhyayesvarapranidhana, while performing the techniques. So people do injure themselves when they TRY to practice based on a misunderstanding of what a yoga practice actually is, but if you are REALLY practicing yoga, if you are connected, I don’t think you can injure yourself.
What are the benefits you can realistically expect to gain from a yoga practice? Well this would depend on the person practicing, their goals and interests and the quality of the instruction they receive.
Peace.
upsidedowncarl@yogascope.com
www.yogascope.com
posted by upsidedowncarl at 8/07/2005 01:29:00 AM
5 Comments:
Very interesting, Carl! There was a lot to think about, but I was particularly struck by this statement: "In “Yogis Behaving Badly” we can see that the intentions of the teacher are not always in line with the needs of the student."
I don't think that it necessarily follows that a student with a healthy balance of need, desire and, let's just call it, "reality checking" and self-acceptance, is going to be able to avoid injury all the time. Particularly in Ashtanga, there is a risk that the teacher will "help" the student to move master a pose in such a way that the student ends up pushing beyond his or her then-limitations (I call then "then-limitations" because limitations are ever-in flux). I don't see that much of this in Vinyasa, but I have heard of it. But I have experienced it in Ashtanga. The teacher's intentions are all good. But one day, the student's body is a little different from the way it was the day before...and suddenly the same adjustment that worked the day before sets the stage for some post-practice OUCH. Or worse.
In my case - I got hurt in a Mari D Adjustment, not because the teacher didn't understand my limits, but because my limits that day were quite different from my limits on other days. I didn't feel or notice the difference myself that day. I only realized it in retrospect, when I was in pain. An if I didn't realize my body was different that day, how could my teacher?
I think that this is something that could happen between any teacher and any student, unfortunately, although I do believe it would be less likely outside of an Ashtanga practice, where "getting" a pose has so much less significance and "YEAH BABY!!" surrounding it...
1:00 AM, August 07, 2005
Hey Carl...
Since it was a very long response, I want to go point by point, rather than attempting a "gestalt" approach.
1. You said "A person can be trying to practice yoga and not actually be practicing yoga in a way that is right for them which by definition would mean that they were not exactly practicing yoga."
Lauren's comment: I actually don't agree with this, Carl. I think that if a student is ATTEMPTING to practice yoga, then they ARE practicing yoga. Yoga is defined by the Yoga Sutras Chapter 1, Verse 2 as the stilling of the fluctuations of the conscious mind (Yoga Chitta Vritti Nirodha). The practice of yoga is what you do to acheive "yoga". It is not the acheivement of yoga, itself. To say that one is not practicing yoga just because one is not doing what is right for one's body is looking to the result, not to the practice, not to the journey. I believe that what it takes to practice yoga is the intention to practice yoga. John Scott says that he practices yoga on the golf course - even if he tweaks his elbow in the process, he is still practicing yoga.
2. Carl, you brought up Chapter 1 Verses 5 and 6, which list the causes of the mind's fluctuations. Misunderstanding is one of those causes, as you point out.
Lauren's Comment: I don't think that the Yoga Sutras ever really tell us that we need to stop remembering, imagining, understanding, misunderstanding, sleeping (the causes delineated in Verse 6). I think that the Sutras are saying that this is what we are dealing with each and every day of our lives, and the practice of yoga is how we still the resulting mental fluctuations. So, I am not sure what you were getting at here except as maybe a sequeway into saying that I misunderstood you somehow regarding limitations and abilities of the students (You quoted me here as saying "there is a risk that the teacher will "help" the student to move master a pose in such a way that the student ends up pushing beyond his or her then-limitations” and then go on to say that you think that "one of the places where Lauren may have misunderstood what I am talking about is in her understanding of the abilities and limitations of the student." You went on to address this by analyzing the term limitation as a glass is half empty view (as opposed to the term "ability", which is a glass is half full view) and then by discussing my use of the word "then", as in "then-current". I do think I understood what I meant to say...and it sounds like you did too! :)
3. Carl, you next quoted me saying that "I don't think that it necessarily follows that a student with a healthy balance of need, desire and, let's just call it, "reality checking" and self-acceptance, is going to be able to avoid injury all the time.” You say: IF A STUDENT IS PRACTICING WITHIN HIS ABILITIES AND MEETING HIS OR HER ACTUAL NEEDS IT IS NOT POSSIBLE, EVER, TO CREATE INJURY."
Lauren's Comment: Carl, I stand by that statement 100 percent. If I am walking down the sidewalk, and I am walking within my abilities - not race-walking, not walking on stilletto heels - I still might twist my ankle and get injured. Again, I think you are focused on RESULTS. I am focusing on the process of practicing. You can't look at the results and thereby judge the practice. At least in my opinion.
4. Carl, again, you say that there is a difference between trying to practice yoga and practicing yoga.
Lauren's comment: I disagree for all of the reasons stated above. If you are practicing yoga, you are practicing yoga. If your INTENTION is to be practicing yoga, then you ARE practicing yoga. I believe you mentioned Ahimsa and Satya and Asteya as practices which are part of the practice of yoga. Ahimsa is non-violence, to ourselves or others. Satya is non-lying, to ourselves or others. Asteya is non-coveting. One can fail miserably in his or her attempts to practice these, but if one is TRYING , one is still practicing yoga. When a student goes into the studio, they are (hopefully) encouraged to practice with Ahimsa, Satya (not trying to LOOK like a pose, as opposed to actually doing the work of a pose) and Asteya (not looking at other people's practices and saying - I need to be doing that too!). But their failure to do so at all times does not render their practice of yoga a non-practice. Again, results!! Results are not what we are after - we are after the process. Right?
5. Carl - you mention non-attachment (abyhasa) and self- (svadyaya) as integral to the practice of yoga. I agree that these are important parts of yoga. But a student who comes to the mat for the first time tomorrow may not be able to practice non-attachment or self-study on just about any level, and that student would still be practicing yoga if they had the intention of doing so.
The analogy I like to make is Highway 95. You can be driving on 95 anywhere from Florida to Maine. And the signs point to Maine all the way through. But that doesn't mean you're in Maine. But it also doesn't mean that you are not GETTING to Maine in time, with patience.
6. Carl, you say that a student who gets injured in class must be consciously ignoring his or her body's boundaries. But I really don't feel that is true either. Like I said earlier, I can be injured while walking, just walking. I can also get injured in a more complex yoga pose, just doing the pose. Since our bodies boundaries change daily, it is sometimes hard to know where the boundary is. We are encouraged in yoga, in other spiritual practices as well (such as Buddhism) to go to our edge. Not aggressively, but to snuggle up to it. Sometimes, someone is going to get hurt as a result. I don't think you can practice moving toward an edge without taking the risk of sometimes going over it (take for example, jatthara parivartanasana - falling over to one side is going to happen sometimes as we test our boundaries).
7. Carl, I did not in any way intend to give Pattabhi Jois a bad name or to denegrate Ashtanga in any way. I have the uttmost respect for SKPJ and the practice of Ashtanga. I just wanted to clarify that.
8. Carl, you qualify your good words about Ashtanga by saying that "it is not appropriate for everyone." I truly do not agree with that. I think in a Mysore room, most people can be practicing yoga, at whatever place in the Primary Series they are practicing, even if it is nothing more than their own version of Surya Namaskar A. The whole system relies on the notion that it doesn't matter how far you go in the Series. Wherever you are practicing, you are practicing YOGA.
I am too tired to continue, so consider this part one of my commentary.....:)
Lauren
11:55 PM, August 14, 2005
I guess I had to respond to Lauren's second comment which actually belongs in a different post.
I am going to put Lauren’s comments in brackets and then respond to these point by point. In the above piece, I feel like Lauren makes some valid points but I also think there are places where she misrepresents my written statements and seems not to have fully understood what they actually meant.
{{I think that if a student is ATTEMPTING to practice yoga, then they ARE practicing yoga.}}
I supported my thesis based on a close reading of the Yoga Sutras and from my study with Desikachar and some of his most senior students. There is no question that I have gotten this directly from REAL TEACHERS, teachers who know what they are doing and have decades of experience. I could support this from Desikachar’s writing as well. I was interested to find that it seems that Pattabhi Jois says the same thing and I will post a piece with quotes of his that I feel point to what I have said about yoga practice. Where do you get this idea that all you have to do is attempt to practice yoga and that would mean you are practicing yoga? Are there any requirements? I mean, if I was doing something like cocaine or heroine and thought I was attempting to practice yoga, would I be practicing yoga? Is there any actual meaning to the statement that all you have to be doing is attempting to practice yoga for you to be practicing yoga?
{{Yoga is defined by the Yoga Sutras Chapter 1, Verse 2 as the stilling of the fluctuations of the conscious mind (Yoga Chitta Vritti Nirodha). The practice of yoga is what you do to acheive "yoga".}}
And the Yoga Sutras is very specific about what would constitute practicing yoga. It defines what would make up the practice of yoga. I quoted the Sutra that defines practice. It is Sutra 2.1. It is pretty open. It could be applied to anything but if you are not doing something with those three qualities, (tapasvadhyayaeishvarapranidhanani) according to Sutra 2.1 it is not a yoga practice. That is my understanding of the text. That is the way I was taught the meaning of this Sutra based on one-on-one study with someone who has been working with the Yoga Sutras for a lifetime. So one person could be playing golf and attempting to practice yoga and not be practicing yoga and another could actually be practicing yoga whether he was attempting to or not as long as he/she was in line with what is laid out in Sutra 2.1 which I have laid out in detail in the body of the original post.
{{To say that one is not practicing yoga just because one is not doing what is right for one's body is looking to the result, not to the practice, not to the journey.}}
This is a misunderstanding of process. You can be doing what is right for you and still be involved in a process. The process and the results are not the same thing. Simply engaging in the process in a way where you stay within your limits does not mean that you are stuck on the results. It actually might mean you are less stuck on getting anywhere and more content with where you are which would be a healthy process in line with the yamas and niyamas and in line with Sutra 1.12 and 2.1.
{{I believe that what it takes to practice yoga is the intention to practice yoga.}}
I respect your belief but where does this come from? I have supported my position from the ancient texts and my work with what Pattabhi Jois calls Satgurus or true teachers.
{{John Scott says that he practices yoga on the golf course - even if he tweaks his elbow in the process, he is still practicing yoga.}}
I am not sure but you may be misunderstanding what John Scott means. And just because he says he practices yoga on the golf course does not mean that the whole time he is on the golf course he is practicing yoga.
{{I don't think that the Yoga Sutras ever really tell us that we need to stop remembering, imagining, understanding, misunderstanding, sleeping (the causes delineated in Verse 6). I think that the Sutras are saying that this is what we are dealing with each and every day of our lives, and the practice of yoga is how we still the resulting mental fluctuations.}}
Lauren quoted Sutra 1.2 which says: yogascittavrttinirodhah: nirodhah=complete cessation; yogah=yoga; citta=mind stuff; vrtti=activity: Yoga is the complete cessation of the activities of the mind. Correct understanding, misunderstanding, thoughts and imagination, deep sleep and dreams are the five different kinds of vrtti’s or activities of the mind that Patanjali explains and uses to define the mind. He define’s the mind by its activities and Sutra 1.2 says that Yoga is bringing these activities of the mind to an end so there can be unfiltered conscious awareness. Sutra 1.51 describes this state: tasyapi nirodhe sarvanirodhannirbijah samdhih: Finally, if ever, the mind reaches a state when it has no impressions of any sort. It is open, clear, simply transparent.
If you can make the statement above as what the Yoga Sutras says I would question where you studied the Sutras and with whom. I know it is helpful to study these types of things with someone who actually knows what they are talking about. I feel fortunate that I have had close personal interactions with real teachers who have been teaching for decades and have studied closely with a real teacher themselves. I personally don’t think you have to take any of the Yoga Sutras too seriously. I think it is okay to say that yoga is to create a state of calm and clarity without having to take it to the extreme that the Yoga Sutras does, but the Yoga Sutras is definitely saying you are trying to move towards a state of no mental activities and full consciousness which if you understand anything about Samkhya Philosophy and Yoga these two things (mind and consciousness) are seen as separate. Yoga and Samkhya are related or “sister” philosophies. In Samkhya two main elements are portrayed. One is parusha this could be seen as the true self, or pure consciousness without any physicality; the transcendent reality. The other fundamental element is prakriti: this would be seen as that which is material. Prakriti is further broken up into smaller constituent parts; all the constituent parts as a whole including purusha and prakriti are called the tattvas. The mind, according to Samkhya and Yoga Philosophy is associated with prakriti, that which is material; it is a subtle aspect of the material but an aspect of the material nevertheless; and is associate with the non-real. This is something that a person reading the Yoga Sutras is expected to already know and understand. According to Samkhya philosophy, consciousness is associated with the non-physical, transcendent, really real or parusha. From this perspective, the goal being presented in the Yoga Sutras is to separate the real from the non-real and the non-physical/transcendent reality from the physical; to separate consciousness from the mind so that there is clarity; so that the mind stops interfering with true consciousness. In my opinion you don’t have do believe any of this but it is important to know that if you are talking about what the Yoga Sutras says, you should know what the Yoga Sutras says and what it means.
{{I do think I understood what I meant to say...and it sounds like you did too! :)}}
There were so many levels of misunderstanding in the above paragraph that ended with this statement that there are too many to even consider. My mind is in a whirl. :o) I know Lauren understood what she said. It took me a while to figure out what she meant in her original statement though because it was not all that clearly stated. I read it several times closely to try and understand what she meant.
When I was talking about where I think Lauren misunderstood me it was in the idea of what current limitations are. If you are practicing today, based on yesterday’s limitations you do not understand your current limitations. If you go past your limitations you have gone past them and are no longer practicing within your abilities. This is how Lauren presented her original scenario: “there is a risk that the teacher will "help" the student to move master a pose in such a way that the student ends up pushing beyond his or her then-limitations”. By the words Lauren herself uses, the student has ended up pushing beyond his or her current limitations. This is not staying within his/her current limitations so this is a misunderstanding of what staying within your current limitations means. Yesterday’s abilities are not necessarily today’s. I know Lauren understood what she meant but her expression was confusing and the only reason I understood it is I read carefully several times until I figured out what she was trying to say. :o) It is too bad she did not read my submission carefully enough to figure out that what I was saying she misunderstood was that if you are practicing within your current limitations you will not go past them and once you have gone past your current abilities you are no longer practicing within them.
{{Carl, I stand by that statement 100 percent. If I am walking down the sidewalk, and I am walking within my abilities - not race-walking, not walking on stilletto heels - I still might twist my ankle and get injured.}}
If you twist your ankle there has to be a moment where something happens where you move from being in control to no longer being in control or you would not twist your ankle. Now I think the important point you are trying to make in this statement is that sometimes it is hard to stay within your abilities and that is worth understanding, but to come to harm, something has to occur that causes you to move from within your abilities to outside of that sphere. And in walking down the street there are plenty of things that could cause you to loose focus on where you are or to loose balance that might bring you to a place where you are outside of your abilities for a brief moment and that is all it takes.
{{Again, I think you are focused on RESULTS. I am focusing on the process of practicing. You can't look at the results and thereby judge the practice. At least in my opinion.}}
I think this is a misunderstanding of what I am talking about. We are talking about two different processes. I am definitely not talking about results. And I think that to interpret results on to what I have said you would have to be misunderstanding much of what I have said and much of what I mean. I know this is easy to do though because language is complex. To understand what someone else is talking about you might need to read carefully and take your time to figure out what the other person means. I am talking about a slow process where you are in less of a rush to get to where you are going. If you are moving to master a pose (these were Lauren’s words) you might be pushing the issue a little too hard. If you back off and find a place where you can comfortably stay in the pose where you might not be quite so close to your edge and a little bit more within your abilities, it might take a little longer to get where you think you want to go, but this would still be process rather than end results. There is no pose I have come across that cannot be modified in such a way that the practitioner can practice it in a way that will be appropriate for his/her current needs. This would simply mean that you have to back off to where you are completely comfortable, go less far, and let the process unfold more slowly, over a longer period of time.
{{If your INTENTION is to be practicing yoga, then you ARE practicing yoga.}}
Then what is the purpose of learning how to practice from a teacher if all I need to do is intend to practice to be practicing? Why does Pattabhi Jois emphasize so strongly that you must learn from a True Teacher? Why does he emphasize that if you are doing things incorrectly you are not actually practicing yoga. In one passage in Yoga Mala he talks about pseudo yogis and warns against learning pseudo yoga from pseudo yogis. How is this possible if all you need is to intend to practice to be practicing? Surely there must be more to thousands of years of dedicated practice than this. :o)
For clarity:
{{you mention non-attachment (abyhasa) }}
abhyasa is not non-attachment. abhyasa is practice or bringing your attention towards something: vairagya is distance, space or doing something without attachment. The Sutra I referred to is Sutra 1.12 which states that practice without attachment to the results will bring about the desired results. This is the process I am referring to: going through the process without any attachment to the results. Only someone stuck on the idea of mastering the postures could interprete Pattabhi Jois’s statement that you should be able to stay in the posture indefinitely and breathe smooth, slow breaths, as attachment to the end results rather than hearing it as adapting the posture to where you are. Remember, these are his words not mine. There are many places in Yoga Mala where he states that the postures need to be adapted to the current needs of the individual and that you need the help of a true teacher to do this. This is what he is talking about.
{{and self- (svadyaya)}}
svadhyaya is not self, it is self study.
{{But a student who comes to the mat for the first time tomorrow may not be able to practice non-attachment or self-study on just about any level, and that student would still be practicing yoga if they had the intention of doing so.}}
I think it is okay if we agree to disagree and it seems we do on many levels here. First, I feel that, if the teacher is able to meet the student where they actually are, anyone will be able, right at the very outset, to practice with at least a certain level of self awareness. If a new student studying with a teacher is unable to achieve a certain level of internal connectedness then the instructions given were simply not right for the student at that time. As we practice and get more skilled we get to be able to achieve deeper levels of self awareness and we get more skilled at doing so in the face of greater obstacles. But if a student is worked with in a way that actually is based on where that student actually is any student can achieve a certain level of internal connectedness right at the present moment they are practicing. When a newer student is failing at this, it is often because the teacher has not actually acknowledged where the student actually is or taken the time to try and understand the student well enough.
{{The analogy I like to make is Highway 95. You can be driving on 95 anywhere from Florida to Maine. And the signs point to Maine all the way through. But that doesn't mean you're in Maine. But it also doesn't mean that you are not GETTING to Maine in time, with patience.}}
I like this analogy. I am going to use it. I am driving down 95 and I am intending to get to Maine. I ask for directions and someone gives me bad directions because they did not actually know how to get where I was going. I end up on Route 66 instead. It is still process but I am heading in the wrong direction. Now, say I cannot read the signs because I don’t know how to, or perhaps the signs have all been put up by someone who is trying to confuse me. I could continue to think I am on 95 for quite a while before I figure out that I am heading in the wrong direction. This is why Pattabhi Jois is so insistent that you have to learn from someone who actually, truly, fully knows everything possible about the subject. There is this phrase from the Indian tradition about the blind leading the blind; learning from someone who does not fully understand what they are teaching is part of what that phrase is about.
{{Carl, you say that a student who gets injured in class must be consciously ignoring his or her body's boundaries.}}
I did not say that. This is a misrepresentation of what I said. I think this is a good example of a misunderstanding. I think what you are referring to is where I talk about how a student who is attempting to master a pose from a conscious force of will could end up not paying attention to the signals his/her body is sending and push beyond his limits. It is hard to use forceful aggression on your own system and keep a sense of self reflective awareness.
Here are some of the quotes you could be misunderstanding:
“Trying to achieve a posture from the perspective of conscious, willful force and not acknowledging your current abilities and limitations is counter to accepting where you are and being where you are. For this to happen you also have to be practicing without much self awareness at that current moment in time when the injury occurs.”
“Often when a person is overly focused on the goal of achieving the external form of a posture that for him/her takes extreme effort, there will be a lack of self reflective awareness.”
PLEASE NOTE. I SAID NOTHING ABOUT CONSCIOUSLY INGNORING ONE’S BOUNDARIES AND LAUREN’S STATEMENT IS A COMPLETE MISREPRESENTATION OF THE MEANING OF MY STATEMENTS. I WOULD SUGGEST CLOSER READING.
I think perhaps what I am trying to get at is hard to express in words. If you are moving from a conscious force of will, you are moving from a sense of your own self importance or a need for conscious control over something. I don’t like the term so I try to avoid using it but another way of expressing this might be that one is moving from his/her sense of I-ness or ego. This is in direct conflict with moving from an organic sense of wholeness where the conscious willpower is put in its proper place as working in harmony with the actual needs of body. When you move from this sense of mind/body connectedness the mind’s actions become those of awareness which helps you move towards less mind and more consciousness and awareness. When this is occurring the body will end up telling the mind how far to go and what to do instead of the other way around and the mind will be listening. And this is a powerful, challenging, long and slow process.
{{Since our bodies boundaries change daily, it is sometimes hard to know where the boundary is.}}
Beautiful. As we practice, over time, with good instruction from a qualified teacher, we may come to understand what our boundaries are on that particular day, more and more successfully. And as abilities and limitations change we of course try and connect with where we are on that particular day. It is true that you could end up slipping, and there is nothing wrong with this. But slipping is not the process we are looking for. These are two different processes. It takes a lot to learn how to get the mind to calm enough so that you can observe with awareness and not attempt to do anything but listen and respond instead of reacting and imposing.
{{We are encouraged in yoga, in other spiritual practices as well (such as Buddhism) to go to our edge. Not aggressively, but to snuggle up to it.}}
This sounds nice.
{{Sometimes, someone is going to get hurt as a result. I don't think you can practice moving toward an edge without taking the risk of sometimes going over it…}}
Beautiful. So you have made my point. When you practice going towards your edge you can sometimes go over it. And all I am saying is that if you don’t go over your edge you cannot get hurt. If you are trying to stay within your abilities and wind up going over your edge, there is nothing wrong with this. There is no blame involved. You simply were not successful at staying within your boundaries.
These are Lauren’s words: “When you practice going towards your edge you can sometimes go over it.” Going over your edge is not staying within your abilities. You cannot get hurt unless you go beyond your actual abilities.
And when you start becoming more and more successful at staying within your boundaries very cool things happen and your practice progresses in ways you never would have imagined. The simplest things have profound effects. Crawling helps teach babies how to walk. :o) If you crawl in your yoga practice the skills of walking will also be developed. The reason I can press up into a handstand has a lot to do with my practicing things like pelvic tilts and cat-cow. Not because of bludgeoning myself with handstand practice.
{{Carl, I did not in any way intend to give Pattabhi Jois a bad name or to denegrate Ashtanga in any way. I have the uttmost respect for SKPJ and the practice of Ashtanga. I just wanted to clarify that.}}
I am not sure where Lauren got the idea that anyone was saying she was denigrating Pattabhi Jois. I said that the conversation could reflect badly on him because the subject was injuries during Ashtanga practice. Look at the text on the blog. Well here it is anyway: “Now, because it sounds like what has been said about Ashtanga could give Pattabhi Jois a bad name I am going to let him speak for himself.” And if you follow Pattabhi Jois’s directions you really cannot get hurt.
{{Carl, you qualify your good words about Ashtanga by saying that "it is not appropriate for everyone." I truly do not agree with that. I think in a Mysore room, most people can be practicing yoga, at whatever place in the Primary Series they are practicing, even if it is nothing more than their own version of Surya Namaskar A. The whole system relies on the notion that it doesn't matter how far you go in the Series. Wherever you are practicing, you are practicing YOGA.}}
I think there is a bait and switch going on here. In Lauren’s first comment she said that it is easier to get hurt in an Ashtanga practice than in other kinds of practice because there is such a focus on the end results of achieving postures. Here words were: “I think that this is something that could happen between any teacher and any student, unfortunately, although I do believe it would be less likely outside of an Ashtanga practice, where "getting" a pose has so much less significance and "YEAH BABY!!" surrounding it...” In this post she is saying that she is not focused on the results but merely on the process and that everyone can practice based on the Mysore system of Ashtanga. Well which one is it. Or does Lauren mean that anyone can practice and get hurt practicing Ashtanga? :o)
I have a client who has one leg that is six inches shorter than the other and only a very small amount of the work that would happen in the primary series would even be remotely useful to him. I have another client with one arm. I don’t think it would be useful for him to waste his time a much of that work either. I have a client in a wheelchair, paralyzed from the waist down. There is no way that anything that happens in the primary series would even be remotely possible. Now there are modifications of many postures that would be fine for these people but a standardized practice would not. NO STANDARDIZED PRACTICE INCLUDING MYSORE STYLE ASHTANGA CAN BE RIGHT FOR EVERYBODY.
It is also worth understanding that over time any set sequence of exercises, any set yoga practice, will become less relevant to a practitioner or it may even become harmful. Even when there was a point when the practice was right for the person, over time repeating that one set series of postures will eventually end up causing problems for the practitioner if they practice that set series exclusively. This has to do with the way our systems work. Too much repetition of the same exercises over time will eventually create problems. The best advice I can give about this is that quote from the Heart of Yoga about how the practice needs to be continually adapted to the current needs of the practitioner.
And the generalized work that happens in any standardized sequence might cause balance for one person and create imbalance in another, on the physical, energetic, emotional and spiritual levels. So the idea that one sequence would be useful for everyone is a little fanciful and naïve. But if a set practice is working for you right now, I am happy. I would only hope that if it stops working for you at any point, you are open to the signs your system is giving you and you are able to adapt and change your practice to suit your current needs rather than getting stuck in a system that does not bend to your needs. And yes the Mysore system does bend, particularly if you follow Pattabhi Jois’s directions, but so many of the people I know who get stuck in practicing it have a rigidity in their minds that prevent the Mysore practice from having that malleability that it is supposed to have if you are following Pattabhi Jois’s instructions. I know so many people who have ended up having to have surgery because they practiced Mysore Ashtanga long after it was clearly no longer appropriate for them. I know of people who have had knee surgery, back surgery, shoulder surgery, torn ligaments, ripped cartilage, hyper-mobile sacrums; the list goes on. When this kind of thing happens something has gone drastically wrong somewhere.
One time when I was in one of David Swenson’s workshops, at the end, after getting tired of all the hum drum questions that so many who are obsessed with Ashtanga ask so consistently, David said: “I do this stuff because I like to do other things with my life. This is a tool to help you learn to practice your own yoga. In the end the idea is that you practice your own yoga and you don’t get stuck on a system. This practice is simply all the elements organized in a coherent way so that you can learn the fundamentals and learn how to develop your own practice.”
1:19 AM, August 22, 2005
It's June 2007 and I still enjoyed reading and learned a lot from Lauren and Carl's exchange. Exciting...KT
9:44 PM, June 08, 2007
Looking forward to reading the more information about this.
Thanks,
http://theyogakids.com/our-program/
11:28 PM, January 13, 2013
Post a Comment
<< Home