Dogma free Yoga

Yoga Discussion General Yoga
#1

After reading a recent thread about Hinduism and Yoga, I’ve come to realize, that like Martial Arts, Yoga has purists, and contemporary practitioners.
When I started Martial Arts I went through a Kararte phase, then a Kung Fu phase, then finally I got into mixed martial arts. Some of the Karate and Kung Fu practitioners, were real purists. They thought there particular tradition was the greatest, and that the tradition must be kept pure and authentic, or else one would be jeopardizing there martial arts lifestyle.
When I got into mixed martial arts it was dead opposite. You kept any of the traditional stuff that really works, and throw out the parts that don’t, and discover new techniques that really work. The art is able to evolve and become more practical. Anyone who is into UFC and MMA, knows what I’m talking about.

Much to my surprise (don’t laugh, I’m pretty new to this:D), Yoga has exactly the same phenomena. There a purists who like to remain faithful to the traditional culture and practices of Yoga, and there are more contemporary practitioners who like to take elements of Yoga, and utilize whatever best benefits them, and discard whatever they find non-applicable to their lives.

This question is aimed at the latter, I would like to hear from contemporary about what you use Yoga for? What aspects do you utilize, How do you find it benefits you?

I thought I might start by answering that -I think Yoga is very efficient. I basically use it as a moving meditation. Very much like a Zen mindfulness activity. It simultaneously helps with my physical health and posture, while stilling my wandering mind. Yoga for me is also about giving. If I can do 1-2 hours of Yoga in the morning, I feel that I have given to myself, and am in a position to really give to other. It’s the best way I can start my day in the right frame of mind, and the best way to settle and re-gather myself at night.

#2

It may look like tradition hardens, and using in yoga only what you think you need is a free approach.
But, what is tradition? I think, its a precious knowledge which came to us through centuries from wise pepople, people of great spirit. At first we may use traditional approach without understanding. Thus, it helps to move closely to essence, not losing the path. Then, viveka is developing in us, and we see the reason why things should be done that way. Some of us have ability to differentiate true reasons from false every time without any help, and its a great advantage.

#3

[QUOTE=Sasha;33932]Some of us have ability to differentiate true reasons from false every time without any help, and it`s a great advantage.[/QUOTE]

I certainly agree with this comment. It is an advantage to differentiate fallacy from facts, thanks for you input… any answers from contemporary practitioners out there?

#4

Dogmatists exist in any realm of human endeavour. It is a condition unique to people as they strive to tap into exosystems they are unable to generate themselves, creating all sorts of ‘isms’. Yoga is no exception. What I find amusing is that dogmatists latch onto and defend a system that strives to relieve one of one’s dogma.:???:

What is also amusing is that much of what the world perceives as Yoga came into existence within the past 150 years, although it does have its roots in a 5,000 year old tradition. My view of yoga is much like my view on music or art. In art school the debate raged on between the traditionalists and the modernists (probably still does). But, for art or music this debate is meaningless as it will find channels to evolve and change in spite of the dogma debates.

Tolstoy, in War and Peace, wrote that, “Among the innumerable subdivisions that can be made in the phenomena of life, one can subdivide them all into those in which content predominates and those in which form predominates.”

To your question in your post: I strive to the latter as I tend to be drawn to the creative and the new. I am inspired by new ways to address and express old ideas. It doesn’t invalidate the tradition, just enriches it with the ever-growing wealth of human intelligence.

#5

I think one problem with current world spirituality is that it attempts to amalgamate all traditions in the world whether they be religious, spiritual, secular, scientific and ends up creating a hodge podge which is neither here or there.

Yoga does not need to be combined with anything else because it is already a self-contained path. There is no need to combine Yoga with Buddhism, Taoism, Sufism or Kabbalah, because Yoga already has every aspect of those traditions, but those traditions do not have everything that Yoga has.

Buddhism only has meditation. Sufism only has the whirling dance and the bhakti. Kabbalh only has self-analysis. Taoism has Qigong. Yoga has them all, including the proper theory and practice.

So there is no need to look outside of Yoga because it is all inclusive. The basic framework Patanjali has laid describes the entire science exactly. Exact sciences do not evolve.

#6

Neither do dogmatists.

#7

[QUOTE=YogiAdam;33930]After reading a recent thread about Hinduism and Yoga, I’ve come to realize, that like Martial Arts, Yoga has purists, and contemporary practitioners.
When I started Martial Arts I went through a Kararte phase, then a Kung Fu phase, then finally I got into mixed martial arts. Some of the Karate and Kung Fu practitioners, were real purists. They thought there particular tradition was the greatest, and that the tradition must be kept pure and authentic, or else one would be jeopardizing there martial arts lifestyle.
When I got into mixed martial arts it was dead opposite. You kept any of the traditional stuff that really works, and throw out the parts that don’t, and discover new techniques that really work. The art is able to evolve and become more practical. Anyone who is into UFC and MMA, knows what I’m talking about.

Much to my surprise (don’t laugh, I’m pretty new to this:D), Yoga has exactly the same phenomena. There a purists who like to remain faithful to the traditional culture and practices of Yoga, and there are more contemporary practitioners who like to take elements of Yoga, and utilize whatever best benefits them, and discard whatever they find non-applicable to their lives.

This question is aimed at the latter, I would like to hear from contemporary about what you use Yoga for? What aspects do you utilize, How do you find it benefits you?

I thought I might start by answering that -I think Yoga is very efficient. I basically use it as a moving meditation. Very much like a Zen mindfulness activity. It simultaneously helps with my physical health and posture, while stilling my wandering mind. Yoga for me is also about giving. If I can do 1-2 hours of Yoga in the morning, I feel that I have given to myself, and am in a position to really give to other. It’s the best way I can start my day in the right frame of mind, and the best way to settle and re-gather myself at night.[/QUOTE]

I was thinking about this lately a lot.
And I have two polar views on the subject.

  1. My personal feel that everything is on the move. Everything changes and evolves. This is the case for some religions, medicine, architecture, even grammar changes every decade!
    Yoga has evolved too. There are lot of CONTEMPORARY books on the diet, anatomy and body cleansing procedures, as well as some “smart” modification of asanas… Some of them contrary to Hatha Yoga Pradipika. By the way one chapter of HYP offers to wipe genitals with ash from cow manure. What a bizarre technique! Thought, ash kills bugs and the same procedure could be very useful in the ancient India.
    Meditation has evolved as well. New techniques emerged. New “tools” became available. Meditation closely linked to therapy rather than to religion now-days.
    Everything is evolving and so does Yoga discipline.

  2. Every philosophical system and every religious branch should follow the same strict rules. Look at orthodox Christians. This is the one of most canonic religious systems. Should something change and that would be something else: another branch of Cristian religion.
    Some Yoga schools ignore meditation and make emphasis on asanas. Most of yoga instructors and schools in the States do it. AND IT is clearly said in yoga scriptures: YAMA, NIJAMA, ASANA, PRANAJAMA, etc…
    There are a set pf rules in each system. If you follow the rules - you are part of the system. Can one be a good Cristian and not go to Church at all? He pray to his imaginary gods at his yard… that would be pagan or something else.
    Can one become a good athlete sitting on the couch watching football and eating popcorn? Nope. One need to have rules: diet, everyday training, etc.
    Some people are able to use their “super minds” and extract from the system what they need.
    99% of us need rule and dogma in order to stay organized and achieve some results in any field and discipline.
    What is going to happen if everyone will come up with HIS OWN YOGA STYLE??? (which indeed is happening now…)

#8

It really depends how you define “Dogma” In the Yoga system there are no rules, there are just general principles that we must adhere to. The particular way we adhere to them is not prescribed. For example there is no one way of practicing ahimsa, it is all based on situation. Likewise Yoga is based on general principles of how the mind-body system works, which hold true for modern man as much as they did ancient man.

Patanjali’s 8-stage sequence is not going to change.

The Yamas and Niyamas are basic moral and personal observances that we need to discipline the mind. These will never change. So for example practicing mindfulness(santosha) is going to train the mind to concentrate in the day. If you do not practice this you will not train it.

The asanas are basic physical trainings that we need to discipline the body. These will never change either. As certain asanas have direct effects on the hunan body, stimulate certain glands and produce energy circuits of energy. If you do not practice asanas you will not create the required energy circuits. The aim is to create the energy circuit.

Pranayama or breathing exercises are connected to prana which in turn is reflected to the state of mind. So regulation of breath is going to directly control the prana which is going to directly control the mind. This basic principle of mind is never going to change for it a scientific law.

Pratyahara is a natural consequence of cultivation of prana through breathing. It leads to introversion of mind(sensory withdrawal) and then one recedes into the subconscious. This will also never change. It is a basic scientific law of the mind.

Dharana follows on naturally from pratyahara. The mind needs an object as a focal point to concentrate on otherwise it will jump from thought to thought and not be able to meditate. The use of a focal point for meditation will also never change. It is yet another basic scientific law of the mind.

Dhayana and Samadhi. These follow naturally from Dharana and reaching these stages is another thing that will never change. If you do dharana eventually you will reach Samadhi. Again because it is based on actual scientific laws of the mind.

So the general principles of Yoga will not change because it is an exact science. Now here is what will change: technologies can change.

Better technologies can be developed to create the basic energy circuits. This can be through physical engineering of the body, through the use of chemical substances, though the use of mind techologies like biofeedback, sensory deprivation tanks or binaural beats and other mind-body techologies.

Through technology we can find faster and faster ways to get to the end-goal of Yoga. Maybe in the future doing physical exercises will be a thing of the past, and all we will need to do is simply hook some machine or device to our head and enter Samadhi, or use mind-body technologies to train us much faster than a regimen of physical yoga exercises can.

The general principles of Yoga will always remain the same though.

#9

If we start understanding Patanjali’s Yoga from the 8 limbs, it is unfair to him. Those limbs are the means and not an end. End is ‘enlightenment’ and the journey is in search of the ultimate truth. “Enlightened” is really our natural state. We alienate from it because of the mind modifications that keep us hopelessly wrapped up in “I” awareness thereby rejecting everything else as untruth.

Mind modifications are caused by thoughts, which act on a constant avalanche of sense impulses as the raw material with ego and mind as joint processors. Mind is a colored and dwarfed edition of the Universal Mind. For such a corrupted mind to return to its majestic level requires purification of gross and subtle layers of our being. The 8 limbs come in as the purifiers.

Each individual is different and so are his/her purification needs. Patanjali therefore shows only the signposts that a Yogi would meet en route to enlightenment and recommends principles that will decide the effect of the purification process. For example, non-violence. If you follow it in thoughts, words, and deeds it would rapidly purify, if you are any short of total compliance , even for a super-solid justification, it won’t. He does the same thing about karma. He does not say ‘good karma’ and ‘bad karma’ (that is a vernacular invention) he only explains the rule that every cause will be followed by its effect.

How can it be dogmatic? Even about asana, Patanjali recommends only such asana that will allow you to hold a balanced posture (on all the three levels - physical, astral and causal) so that you can dissolve your awareness of the body as an aid to dharana-dhyana-samadhi. He does not even name a single asana, leave aside laying down any method.

In fact, Patanjali is one who wants a Yogi to reject any authority in any books, guru or traditions and rely entirely on “self-realization” as the only testimony of truth. Today, there is a need to return to the original Yoga-Sutra, not in search of dogmas or any fundamentalism or being a purist; but simply because today’s Yoga thought appears to have completely lost its way in the jungle of styles, self-proclaimed authorities and a huge loss in translation.

Innovations can never be done by taking little of this and little of that. Disciplines like Yoga are holistic built on intricately woven principles. But it touches human life in so many ways that one is tempted to pick up a small thread that touches and feels free to wrap it in one’s ego and to call it “OWN YOGA”. That plasticity is a strength of Yoga, but is ironically casting a cloud of ignorance around it.

There is no need for any technology to quicken Yoga. Patanjali is himself telling us about how a human being produces energy at Muladhar chakra with fusion process and at Swadhisthana chakra with fission process. Prana energy is a derivative of cosmic life-force that Patanjali’s Yoga shows how to control and use. He shows how to achieve ‘speed of mind’ which is phenomenally superior to ‘speed of light’. A very superior technology is in Yoga itself. What we need is to rise up to the heights of Yoga with a lot of patience, perseverance and devotion. Only a skin-deep, flippant understanding of Yoga, not born out of experience makes it look small.

#10

Suhas,

Very true.

Those innovations, or what you might call “OWN YOGA” are not a new thing. Let us not forget that the Pradipika was intended equally to eliminate those “innovations,” or those variations to interpretation which are inevitable to centuries of aural communication, as well as to compile those techniques which were already proven most consistent and reliable. In other words, it is not only a document of what IS yoga, but what is NOT.

Since the human mind and body have remained essentially unchanged without evolution over the past 5000 years, and since that vibration we seek to resonate more fully through practicing yoga is at an all time low and will continue to be for the rest of our foreseeable lives (the decline of which was anticipated by the rishis and in effect was the impetus for those documents), the Yoga Sutras and Patanjali are simply the best we are going to get. If we consider these fundamentals carefully, (the lack of human evolution and the decline of OM), it should also become clear that when we depart from the sutras we are in effect sacrificing our control group without recourse or any chance of knowing the implications. That is in some ways what is happening today. Kind of like…“what I do not know will not hurt me?”…which is simply false. Those who say the Sutras are dogma do not understand they also choose to be part of that which had already been excluded from yoga. Will that hurt? We do not know. Are you getting results? Have you given up? There might just be a reason why.

So to answer the question, in my opinion, there will never be anything contemporary about yoga, and anything contemporary in yoga is simply something else.
peace,
siva

#11

[QUOTE=siva;34221]
So to answer the question, in my opinion, there will never be anything contemporary about yoga, and anything contemporary in yoga is simply something else.
peace,
siva[/QUOTE]

Yes, I think I would have to agree with that. However, if we practice a ‘contemporary Yoga’, we would still use the word ‘Yoga’. for the sake of communicating the practice to others. For example, if I only wanted to do Asana for my physical health and a way to chill out, I would probably still refer to it as ‘Yoga’ when conversing with others. This is how things evolve.

There are many traditions, that take on different forms and meanings over the course of time. Look at Christmas. It was originally a Pagan holiday, then it was changed to a Christian holiday, and named ‘Christmas’, and now it’s just an end of year family celebration. Easter was a Pagan holiday, using Pagan fertility symbols (egg and Bunny), then it got hijacked by Christians, and now it’s just a holiday where you buy each other chocolate. Yoga seems to be doing the same. Although it may not be traditional Hindu Yoga, it’s still a from of Yoga, because the definition of Yoga has gradually broadened and evolved.

#12

[QUOTE=siva;34221]Since the human mind and body have remained essentially unchanged without evolution over the past 5000 years[/QUOTE]

Siva,
What do you mean by lack of human evolution in last 5000 years? By evolution you mean biological evolution or in other sense? I’m asking because almost everywhere I read about evolution of humans (biological, social, technological, even spiritual-in social context) and never found a perspective from which you could see otherwise.

#13

So am I to reject ashtanga, iyengar, and any practice save the original 13 Hatha asanas? That would shorten my time commitment considerably.

#14

[quote=Pawel;34239]Siva,
What do you mean by lack of human evolution in last 5000 years? By evolution you mean biological evolution or in other sense? I’m asking because almost everywhere I read about evolution of humans (biological, social, technological, even spiritual-in social context) and never found a perspective from which you could see otherwise.[/quote]

Pawel,

I guess i could say genetically, but what I mean more precisely is physiological, anatomical, etc: the mechanics involved in yoga have not changed.

#15

Adam,

Not necessarily. As a “purist,” I feel that yoga can not be broadened, nor has it evolved at all to this point, but rather it has become fragmented and dilute. You could include the later Tantric stuff as it’s last evolutionary phase when it became most obvious that the human body’s response to yoga declines over time in proportion to the variations introduced, which they had centuries to observe, and wrote them out. Conemporary yoga in some ways would like to write them back in. Yea, you can still call it yoga, but in my mind, it can only be a shell of its former self.

That’s ideally of course, and does not mean contemporary perspectives have no value, but you have to get the ABCs right, and for my money, I go with the purist, old stuff, because say for example, “asana” means “static” pose. I point that out to emphasize the difference between something from the sutras, and something that’s based on style. If the foundation is right, you can do anything contemporary, but here the converse it not true.

peace,
siva

#16

[QUOTE=FlexPenguin;34241]So am I to reject ashtanga, iyengar, and any practice save the original 13 Hatha asanas? That would shorten my time commitment considerably.[/QUOTE]

ashtanga/iyengar for 15 minutes - 30 mintutes or however long you wish . .

Then the rest the foundations. The most important ones. from the teaching. They are simple and worthy of thorough understanding.

Especially shavasana lots of important things can be done in shavasana.

#17

[QUOTE=siva;34268]Adam,

Not necessarily. As a “purist,” I feel that yoga can not be broadened, nor has it evolved at all to this point, but rather it has become fragmented and dilute. You could include the later Tantric stuff as it’s last evolutionary phase when it became most obvious that the human body’s response to yoga declines over time in proportion to the variations introduced, which they had centuries to observe, and wrote them out. Conemporary yoga in some ways would like to write them back in. Yea, you can still call it yoga, but in my mind, it can only be a shell of its former self.
peace,
siva[/QUOTE]

Yeah, Sorry I wasn’t really trying to say that the practice of Yoga is taking steps forward or anything. I just mean more that the definition is possibly changing. You might find a gym that has Yoga/pilate/perfect abs class on Tuesday night, with no mention of meditation or Sutras or Philosophy, and you might say ‘that’s not Yoga’, and I would agree with you. But the person going to the Yoga/Pilates/Perfect Abs class, might tell you that they do a little Yoga, and in a way they could be right as the DEFINITION of Yoga has broadened. You and I wouldn’t agree they they do Yoga, but they would. I don’t know if that makes sense. I could just be babbling.

#18

Man is not the measure of himself. If somebody says that going to the gym and doing a little physical exercise is Yoga, they are not doing Yoga at all.

Yoga is always going to remain what it always has been a science of self-realization. Take bits and pieces out of it, combining with pilates and ab workout is not Yoga.

#19

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;34274]Man is not the measure of himself. If somebody says that going to the gym and doing a little physical exercise is Yoga, they are not doing Yoga at all.

Yoga is always going to remain what it always has been a science of self-realization. Take bits and pieces out of it, combining with pilates and ab workout is not Yoga.[/QUOTE]

Yes, I agree. But they might call it Yoga, then their friends call it Yoga, then there community calls it Yoga. So now the definition of Yoga has changed. We might say it’s not Yoga, just like I might say modern music, is not music, but they do call it Yoga. There’s nothing we can do about that.

#20

Consensus does not make truth.

If a person calls the earth flat, so does his friends, then the whole community this is not going to change the fact that the earth is not flat. Similarly, it does not matter how many people call Yoga an exercise system, it is not going to change the fact that Yoga is a Hindu science of self-realization. The very meaning is embedded in the word “Yoga” itself.