The Ashtanga Yoga of Mr Jois, was developed by Mr Krishnamacharya, as a series of yoga asana sequences. Apparently it was never intended to be a complete yoga system. Just as Mr Krishnamacharya might prescribe a series of asanas for someone’s specific health concern, Mr Jois’s “Ashtanga Yoga” was series for a specific intent. In this case, it was intended for healthy active youngsters who needed physical exercise and mental focus. Obviously Mr Krishnamacharya would not have prescribe this “Ashtanga Yoga” for the elderly.
“The schools of Desikachar and Iyengar do teach yoga that can be quite rigorous.”
Really? I have yet to discover rigorous yoga in the Desikachar tradition.
[QUOTE=AmirMourad;62225]There is a tremendous difference. The so called “Ashtanga” yoga that has become popular has very little to do with Raja Yoga. It was simply that the ancient term “eight-limbed” was adopted and exploited for an entirely different purpose. “Ashtanga” yoga has no place whatsoever for meditation. Nor is it a method for the expansion of consciousness towards ones enlightenment. It is simply a series of physical exercises. Raja Yoga has very little to do with the asana practice which most in the West have become infatuated with. Raja Yoga refers to any method which seeks to come to ones awakening through means of meditation. And you can continue practicing all of these physical exercises for eternities, but as long as one has yet to come to direct insight into ones own mind and its programming, it is not going to be of any help. It is fine if you are simply interested in exercise - but it is not yoga. At the most, it can be called asana practice. And what people like Patabhi Jois and many others have done is absolutely irresponsible. He himself is not awakened, and unless you have come to your awakening - it is almost impossible to assist others towards their own awakening. This is a ladder towards coming to a direct perception of ones divine nature, and anything else has nothing whatsoever to do with yoga.[/QUOTE]
Gee, Amir, while I, too bemoan the sweat factories that purport to be teaching “yoga” which abound these days, I have to humbly disagree with some of what you say here.
First, Pattabhi Jois (who is dead, btw, and, for all we know, [I]could[/I] have reached “enlightenment” upon his passing) NEVER in his lifetime stated that he was “enlightened” - perhaps his students have done so, but as far as I know, he never did. Beware of teachers who tell you they are “enlightened”. So, to accuse him of being irresponsible or even exploiting students in the way you imply is simply wrong. Should he have adopted another name for it? Perhaps…there would be less confusion! Was it aggrandizing to use Ashtanga as the name? Perhaps…but he had his reasons.
The wise say there are many paths, but only one Truth (I’m badly quoting the Vedas here). In other words, ALL paths are valid and legitimate - if the one treading their own particular path feels that it is bringing them closer to the Truth. You say that the Ashtanga (Vinyasa) yoga being practiced today is not one of these paths, is not yoga, and is not a method for the expansion of consciousness. I contend that it is all about the intention of the practitioner that makes the practice “yoga” or “not yoga”. If I want to get fit, yes, this asana practice will make me fit, flexible, strong and healthy and hopefully improve my life and lengthen it.
But, that’s not all I want to find through Ashtanga Yoga - nor was that my goal when I first began to practice it. I want to expand my own understanding of consciousness - I humbly but earnestly seek enlightenment, too (don’t we all, ultimately?). Ashtanga Vinyasa Yoga is MY path towards that goal. It’s not yours, and that’s fine. But, please, don’t knock mine, and I won’t knock yours. That’s akin to saying one religion is better than another.
I’m well into my second decade of practice, and I can attest to the fact that you can and do find meditative states during this flowing movement practice. (And certainly, there are other examples of movement-based practice that leads to meditative states and to the Truth as well - the practice of Tai Chi and even Whirling Dervishes are two examples that come to mind.) And, it also enhances and enables the practice of all of Patanjali’s eight limbs. Very simply put, it makes you live ethically (yamas), it makes you treat your body/mind better (niyamas), it improves your ability to do breathing exercises (pranayama), it brings your focus inside (pratyahara), it enhances the ability to concentrate (dharana), and it helps you to find deep states of meditation (dhyana).
So, why would Ashtanga Vinyasa Yoga ultimately NOT lead to the last limb - samadhi - if all the other limbs are accessible through it?
Was Krishnamacharya a charlatan? Certainly not - he really knew what he was doing when he developed this practice, and drew upon a lifetime of study in it’s creation. He understood the body is just another portal for realization of the Truth and that in order to find that, it was much easier when the body was functioning at it’s best.
Again, there are many paths, and all are valid. I’m not saying that everyone would have a meditative experience doing Ashtanga Vinyasa Yoga - just that it [I]is [/I]possible. Ashtanga (Vinyasa) Yoga is not just simply “a series of physical exercises” as you state. Certainly, yes, Krishnamacharya, and Jois after him, taught these sequences of postures to help with building strength and flexibility (srsti) in the young, and as therapy, too (cikitsa). Once the body becomes acclimatized to the practice, Krishnamacharya intended their use for the maintenance (raksana) of health throughout a hopefully prolonged life. So, why the emphasis on building strength, flexibility, and therapeutic maintenance of the body through asana practice? Perhaps, if you live longer, you have a better chance of finding enlightenment than someone who dies at 65 of heart disease. (There are many pictures of K well into his 80’s practicing these postures.)
I’ve come to believe the practice is just one means (for those with whom it resonates) to optimize the human instrument, to get it “vibrating” to the right pitch, as it were, both body and mind, so that it can become a vehicle for the expansion of compassion, awareness, happiness and ultimately, consciousness.
Yes, there are many, many people who are practicing just to get a washboard stomach and to simply become fit. Yes, there is a huge misconception about what yoga is, especially in the States - that it’s just about doing postures. I bemoan this misconception. I know several “teachers” with packed classrooms full of sweating people, who shout affirmations and aggressively adjust students, blasting pop music all the while, and calling it yoga. Is it “yoga”, what they are doing? It depends on their intent and the intent of the student. At the very least, for most, it’s just fun. Nothing wrong with it. Many have appropriated the word yoga to sell their form of fun. And there’s no law against that.
Still, while thery are having fun, they are finding a glimpse of happiness, and maybe having the occasional burst of mental clarity and compassion that arises from movement practice, so this is not a bad thing. Their bodies are healthier, and they don’t drain the health care system like someone who sits around all day eating chips and watching TV. So, I say, good for them! Many people find yoga in this way, through the body…and then it leads them from the gross (the body) to the subtle (the mind/consciousness/spirit) and they discover that there are other limbs besides the third one.
I also learned from those who had many years of direct experience with Patabi Joice, the asana practice suits me well into my fifties but never did I consider it anything other than an efficient asana practice.
Why would someone say that Ashtanga Yoga is not yoga. Of course it is yoga. Just as algebra is mathematics. It may not be the whole ball of wax, but it is definitely a slice of yoga.
[QUOTE=Senin;62782]Why would someone say that Ashtanga Yoga is not yoga. Of course it is yoga. Just as algebra is mathematics. It may not be the whole ball of wax, but it is definitely a slice of yoga.[/QUOTE]
More accurately Pattabhi Jois’s “Ashtanga Vinyasa” is yoga asana, where as Jnana, Bhakti, Karma or Raja yoga is inclusive of Patanjali’s (Ashtanga Yoga) Eight-fold, Eight-limb or Eight-step path.
Confusion with words…
Dishelle,
“I have to humbly disagree with some of what you say here.”
The very fact that you have called it humble in itself shows that it is not.
“First, Pattabhi Jois (who is dead, btw, and, for all we know, could have reached “enlightenment” upon his passing”
No, he was not awakened. And “enlightenment” is not something that one has to wait to happen until the time of death, but if such a thing does happen, it is just a reflection of the way in which one has been living.
“So, to accuse him of being irresponsible or even exploiting students in the way you imply is simply wrong. Should he have adopted another name for it? Perhaps…there would be less confusion! Was it aggrandizing to use Ashtanga as the name? Perhaps…but he had his reasons.”
The reasons are very simple - he simply used ancient terminology to give his “yoga” some credibility and attraction, that is a very old method which has been used countless times before.
“The wise say there are many paths, but only one Truth”
While that is true, it all comes down to the same - to come to more awareness. All of the various methods of yoga are just different skillful means towards this. The very word “yoga” means Union. Any method which brings you into communion with your own true nature is a method towards Yoga. Because Patabhi Jois so called Ashtanga Yoga is not a means towards this, it is not yoga.
“I’m badly quoting the Vedas here”
Stop quoting the Vedas.
“In other words, ALL paths are valid and legitimate - if the one treading their own particular path feels that it is bringing them closer to the Truth.”
It has nothing whatsoever to do with your own feelings, which are often just as deceptive as ones thoughts. Because certainly - if you were to do things your way, you will do things according to your likes and dislikes. What you like may be a great hindrance, and what you dislike may be a stepping stone towards your liberation. But because you are unable to see beyond your own prejudices, one will fail to realize this. Often times, the work of coming to ones awakening will be tremendously uncomfortable. If you are seeking comfort and security - you should seek elsewhere, yoga is not for you. Because mans is so deeply programmed, that if he even takes a small step outside of his comfort zone, fear arises, and one want to return back to the protective walls that you have built around yourself. Ones system is such, that it will resist transformation at almost any cost. That is why - if you are to see your expansion are just a matter of how you “feel”, then you are opening yourself up to all kinds of delusions. What is needed is not feeling, what is needed is clarity. And your likes and dislikes are amongst the most blinding forces for your clarity.
"I humbly but earnestly seek enlightenment, too (don’t we all, ultimately?)
No, most do not, and if your desire to come to your enlightenment was sincere, then by now you would be doing everything possible to come to know yourself, through and through. But if you are honest with yourself and look closer at your direct experience, you will find that you have countless other priorities. Only those who are willing to loose their lives ever come to know of the fragrance of eternal life.
“That’s akin to saying one religion is better than another.”
What is better or not better than another is just a matter of opinion. What is important is what works. And what works is not a matter of opinion, it is a scientific phenomenon. You can exhaust all of your efforts with a great hope and desire that somehow by walking into the wall you will walk through it, but it is not going to be of any help. And you can try with great hope and desire that a flower will blossom by trying to pull a lotus out of a seed, but it is going to be fruitless.
“So, why would Ashtanga Vinyasa Yoga ultimately NOT lead to the last limb - samadhi”
Anything can lead to samadhi. Just going for a walk in the morning - if you can become absolutely absorbed in the present, then it will lead to samadhi. If you just sweep the floor with absolute mindfulness and attention, then it will lead to samadhi. Because the nature of your action is not the fundamental thing, what is important is the awareness which is behind it. So yes - practicing something like Ashtanga Vinyasa can lead to samadhi if your inner space is prepared for it. But whether the method has been created to bring you to samadhi is an entirely different matter. That was not the intention of Patabhi Jois, and the chances of your reaching samadhi through such a system is very unlikely, because that is not its area of focus.
Senin,
“Of course it is yoga. Just as algebra is mathematics. It may not be the whole ball of wax, but it is definitely a slice of yoga”
No, it is not yoga. Asanas have nothing to do with yoga, neither does pranayam, kriyas, bandhas, mudras, mantras, yantras, or a thousand and one different techniques of meditation. Because the word yoga itself just means Union - it is a certain state of consciousness. Just out of convenience, any method which leads towards this state of consciousness has been called a method of “yoga”. But Yoga is a certain state of being, it is not a technique. That is why Patanjali has said that “Yoga is bringing the mind to a state of stillness, then the Seer sees into his own true nature”. Vyasa has said that “Yoga is Samadhi”. And samadhi is none other than enlightenment itself. If you want, you can call all something like asanas “yoga”, words are such that they will mean whatever you want them to mean. But it is important to be absolutely aware of this distinction.
“Asanas have nothing to do with yoga, neither does pranayam, kriyas, bandhas, mudras, mantras, yantras, or a thousand and one different techniques of meditation.”
I get it now, Amir. Asana, pranayam, kriyas, bandhas, mudras, mantras and yantras are NOT yoga.
Hmmm, for you, the trip would be the destination. For me, the trip would be the journey.
Frankly, Amir, I think you are wrong.
“Asanas have nothing to do with yoga, neither does pranayam, kriyas, bandhas, mudras, mantras, yantras, or a thousand and one different techniques of meditation.”
Here is someone who is trying to reduce the entire yoga tradition to a various forms of meditation. Only someone who has completely misunderstood the broader scope of Bharata Dharma can come up with something like that.
It is a semantic problem. Yoga does not mean just union. Just one example : In Yoga sutras according to what are considered “classical” commentators such as Vijnana Bhikshu and Vacaspati Mishra, Yoga stems from the Sanskrit root [I]yuj[/I] with the meaning of concentration and not from the root [I]yujir[/I] which implies union. And it makes sense within the Yoga Sutra metaphysics as the goal is the separation between Purusha and Prakriti. In other contexts, the emphasis lies on union. Yoga is a polysemic word, hence the common confusion about concepts expressed by homonyms.
Philippe
[QUOTE=Senin;62834]Hmmm, for you, the trip would be the destination. For me, the trip would be the journey.
Frankly, Amir, I think you are wrong.[/QUOTE]
There may be a time when the journey is an important part of the trip but soon as one loses site of the destination (purpose) the journey may end?journey-destination, perhaps one does not exist without the other?
If someone goes through the tedious effort to explain things in a straightforward precise logical manor, expanding and elaborating difficult concepts without the use of beliefs, faith, acceptance or ego it may be worth considering before disregarding and then respond and present your understanding in a similar manor?
If one sincerely wants to communicate with someone who operates beyond ego then one must move beyond ego?
[QUOTE=Philippe*;62836]It is a semantic problem. Yoga does not mean just union. Just one example : In Yoga sutras according to what are considered “classical” commentators such as Vijnana Bhikshu and Vacaspati Mishra, Yoga stems from the Sanskrit root [I]yuj[/I] with the meaning of concentration and not from the root [I]yujir[/I] which implies union. And it makes sense within the Yoga Sutra metaphysics as the goal is the separation between Purusha and Prakriti. In other contexts, the emphasis lies on union. Yoga is a polysemic word, hence the common confusion about concepts expressed by homonyms.
Philippe[/QUOTE]
You are right, the word yoga in the Bhagavad Gita alone is explained in many different ways (yoga karmasu kaushalam, samatvam yoga uchyate etc). The popular translation of union is not found in the sutras of patanjali, but is mentioned in the yoga yajnavalkya samhita. The word raja yoga itself can have different meanings too. Vivekananda used it to describe ashtanga yoga, but in the Hatha Yoga Pradipika the word raja yoga is used differently.
[QUOTE=Philippe*;62836]It is a semantic problem. Yoga does not mean just union. Just one example : In Yoga sutras according to what are considered “classical” commentators such as Vijnana Bhikshu and Vacaspati Mishra, Yoga stems from the Sanskrit root [I]yuj[/I] with the meaning of concentration and not from the root [I]yujir[/I] which implies union. And it makes sense within the Yoga Sutra metaphysics as the goal is the separation between Purusha and Prakriti. In other contexts, the emphasis lies on union. Yoga is a polysemic word, hence the common confusion about concepts expressed by homonyms.
Philippe[/QUOTE]
Adding to the number of meanings of the term yoga for further consideration; cut and pasted below from the internet;
[I]Yoga means to “unite” or “join” the aspects of ourselves which were never really divided in the first place. It also means to “yoke” or to engage ourselves in a self-training program. Yoga means working with each of the levels or aspects of our being individually, and then unifying all of those into their original whole, or Yoga. Yoga is a Sanskrit word coming from the root “yuj” and relates to both the processes or practices referred to as Yoga and also the goal itself, which is also called Yoga. As the goal, the word Yoga is virtually one and the same with the word Samadhi, the deep, transcendent realization of the highest truth or reality.
Definition of Yoga: The first four sutras define Yoga, with that definition being expanded upon in the other sutras. In a systematic process of meditation, you gradually move your attention inward, through all the levels of your being, gaining mastery along the way. Eventually you come to rest in your true nature, which is beyond all of those levels. This action and the realization of this center of consciousness, is the meaning of Yoga.
Yoga is Samadhi, in the yoga tradition, it is the eighth and final limb identified in the Yoga Sūtras of Pata?jali: Yoga means union, literally, to yoke, from the root yuj, which means to join or to integrate. It means to bring together the aspects of ourselves that were never divided in the first place. It means to attain direct experience of the core of that preexisting holistic being who we truly are at the deepest level, and that is attained through samadhi.
Self-realization, the highest goal of Yoga.[/I]
Senin,
Asana, pranayam, kriyas, bandhas, mudras, mantras and yantras are NOT yoga.
No, yoga, as an experience, is a state of consciousness. But if you are referring to yoga in terms of certain techniques and methods towards this realization - then yes asanas, pranayam, kriyas, bandhas, mantras, yantras or none of these can be involved. Words are such, that they will mean whatever one wants them to mean. When I have made the distinction - it was simply to make it clear that there is a tremendous difference between the mechanical practice of techniques to nourish ones own egotism, and the kind of practice which is as a ladder towards ones liberation. If you think that the essence of yoga has nothing to do with any of these techniques, then one has missed the essential matter - and you can practice for eternities and not have even a single insight into what yoga is.
It is a semantic problem. Yoga does not mean just union.
Then let us forget about the word completely, it is created more complications rather than solving them. It is simply enough to know that there is a kind of practice which leads you towards more and more delusion, and there is a kind of practice which leads towards more awareness. Outwardly, they appear the same.
"Here is someone who is trying to reduce the entire yoga tradition to a various forms of meditation. "
Sarva,
You have misunderstood the message. If you look back you will see that I have said that even a thousand and one forms of meditation have very little to do with the experience of yoga, it is not a matter of meditation. You can come to your awakening without any meditation at all.
[QUOTE=AmirMourad;62874]Senin,
Asana, pranayam, kriyas, bandhas, mudras, mantras and yantras are NOT yoga.
No, yoga, as an experience, is a state of consciousness. But if you are referring to yoga in terms of certain techniques and methods towards this realization - then yes asanas, pranayam, kriyas, bandhas, mantras, yantras or none of these can be involved. Words are such, that they will mean whatever one wants them to mean. When I have made the distinction - it was simply to make it clear that there is a tremendous difference between the mechanical practice of techniques to nourish ones own egotism, and the kind of practice which is as a ladder towards ones liberation. If you think that the essence of yoga has nothing to do with any of these techniques, then one has missed the essential matter - and you can practice for eternities and not have even a single insight into what yoga is.[/QUOTE]
Amir, you seem very, um, opinionated.
I refer to yoga as certain methods towards this realization.
When I hear “mechanical practice of techniques to nourish ones own egotism,” I think, what is the ego that authored this? It is an ego-self writing these words, not a True Self.
Yoga seems to be a path, layed down by the ancients (and not so ancient) for a realization. A walk down this path is yoga.
Astanga-Yoga ist the eightfold path of yoga, described by the ancient sage Rishi Patanjali in the Yogasturas more than 2000 years ago. So the original Astanga-Yoga has nothing to do with the modern inventions like Astanga-Vinyasa-Yoga, which means “special Astanga-Yoga”.
The original Astanga-Yoga describes the eight limbs of yoga, that build up the path to the state of yoga and finally to mukti. To learn the real Astanga-Yoga i can only encourage you to study the Yogasturas of Patananjali.
Senin,
I refer to yoga as certain methods towards this realization.
Any method which leads to this realization, can be called a method of yoga. Be careful to form any fixed ideas about what the method towards realization`is. If it is through meditation, then it is Raja Yoga. If it is through emotion, it is Bhakti yoga. If it is through physical action in the world, it is Karma Yoga. If it is through transformation of the energies of the subtle body, it is referred to as kundalini yoga. If it is through concentration upon a mantra, then it is Mantra Yoga. If it is through development of your inner ears to hear the `Soundless Sound` of Om which lies at the core of your own being, then it is Nada Yoga. If it is through concentration upon various forms of inner light, then it is known as Trataka Yoga. If it is even through channeling your hatred, it is known as Dvesha Yoga, the Yoga of Hatred. And we can continue looking at how many different forms ofyoga`` there are - there have been so many paths towards enlightenment that even if you had a million lifetimes, you would not be able to master all of them. Any method at all that leads towards your realization of your true nature can be referred to as a method towards yoga.
`When I hear “mechanical practice of techniques to nourish ones own egotism,”
Yes, if you are involved in any method without awareness, then it is just mechanical. Rather than freeing you of your conditioning, such a practice will only help strengthen your conditioning and may in fact only contribute to your sufferings.
Yoga seems to be a path, layed down by the ancients (and not so ancient) for a realization.
Yoga is an inner path. Because there are different methods to turn inwards, there are countless different forms of yoga. So as a Path, what we call Yoga can refer to just about any path towards realization. As an experience, the word itself means Union. When you come to a state of consciousness where the finite and the infinite merge as One in your perception, that is the state of Yoga.