Hi
Is anyone able to explain the reason behind the heel to heel vs the heel to back arch foot alignment in some of the standing postures such as trikonasana, virabhadrasana?
I’ve been taught both and am absolutely sure I read somewhere that heel to heel was generally safer but I can’t find where I read this. The reason had something to do with the latter alignment being related to causing instability in the sacro-iliac joint (though I may be wrong).
Thanks in advance
yonita
When I first read your question I thought I didn’t know the answer. Then I stood up next to my computer and did Utthita trikonasana to see what it would be like to align the feet differently than what I am used to. To my ashtonishement it was impossible to perform Utthita Trikonasana at all with the heel aligned with the arch of the foot! Seriously, how do you do it?
To take it from the beginning: When preparing for the pose, I take a large step to the side, turning both my feet towards the long edge of the mat. (OK, in my office it’ll have to be an imaginary mat) Then I turn the right foot 90 degrees to the right, so that the right foot is now aligned with the heel of the left foot. Then I start getting into the pose by tilting the pelvis to the right. NOT bending at the waist! The spine must be perfectly straight all the time, only the pelvis is tilting. The top of the right femur should be “tucked in” towards the tailbone. The top of the left femur will be sort of sticking out, or it may feel that way. How far I can go to the right is for me limited by the flexibility of my hamstrings and psoas muscles. It may be something else that is limiting you. This is how I have learned this pose.
Now, if my right foot is aligned with the arch of the left foot instead of the heel, I can’t go ANYWHERE. I literally could not do the pose when I aligned my feet that way. When I try tilting the pelvis from that alignment, something is getting in the way of something else so that I cannot move. I think that it is my right femur being pressed into the pelvisbone, kind of locking it in place and preventing the pelvis from tilting.
So a good answer was not so hard to find after all
Namaste
Sorry I forgot to clarify the conclusion in my previous post: My conclusion was that aligning the feet heel-to-arch will make it nearly impossible to do the pose correctly. What frequently happens is that people do the pose incorrectly, for instance by trying to bend at the waist. That will cause strain in various places around the hips and lower back, and in the worst case cause injury.
Om Shanti
Thanks Aurora for your input.
I can practice trikonasana it with both alignments, though heel to heel allows marginally more stability.
Many teachers teach with heel to inner arch others heel to heel. I’m wanting to know the anatomical reasoning behind the two camps. Do teachers choose this alignment because they have thought it through or because it is the way they have always done it?
Hmmm, yes I can see now how you can do Utthita trikonasana with the foot-to-arch alignment if you make it like a twist, but I don’t think that particular asana should be a twist…
Anyway, regarding teachers I think that some of them probably have given it a lot of thought, and some of them haven’t. It probably has to do with their experience and how mindful they are of their technique.
So many teachers on this forum. Can anyone else step forward with a reason for their teachings?
I’m bumping this in the event that a teacher out there has an explanation for why they teach the way they do.
In standing poses when your hips are squared to the side (triconasana, virabhradasana 2, parva kanosana) you should be heel to arch.
When your hips are squared to the front (virabhradasana 1, parvo tanasana) you
should be heel to heel…
Our physical bodies have all taken a different path to get right here. Put your foot where it feels good.
Hi Yonita,
Sorry I didn’t see this three years ago when you posted it
The experience of asana is one of constant movement toward the full expression of the pose. This is for the same reason one uses a garden hose without kinks in it to water their veggies - the water flows optimally in a structure that has the least obstructions.
In standing poses said movement is toward or into the plane of the pose. The question of alignment of the feet, as you’ve put it, appears to only apply to open pelvis poses, though I must admit I’m not at my sharpest and may have overlooked something in my thought process.
The optimal alignment (and I personally am using Light on Yoga as a barometer since Iyengar’s work on refining asana is unparalleled) is for the second toe of the front foot and the center of the front heel to bisect the back arch.
For those students who cannot “do” the pose that way because of blockage in the physical body or due to balance issues (also blockage, obviously) those students do heel to heel. Students who still cannot find stability there move the back foot even wider, not so that they will get the full effect but so that they too can “do” the pose and continue movement toward the full expression.
I’m certain there are other anatomical issues at play, specifically with the alignment of the pelvis (illiums), maintaining the hip in joint, and stability in the SI joint.
Hope this helps.
gordon
Great response - I have had so many teachers with different opinions - but this one makes the most sense