Glutes in Backbending?

Yoga Discussion General Yoga
#1

More than once I have had yoga instructors say to not use gluteal muscles in backbending poses. Though I usually try to ask why, and understand what I pass on, this does not always happen. I trusted the sources and have also been telling my students to not use glutes in backbending, that it can hamper hip extension. I was also taught that the glutes can cause lateral rotation, so one is better off using the hamstrings in hip extensions.

Yet last week a massage therapist questioned me about this for she said the glutes can aid in hip extension. “Anatomy of Movement” agrees that the gluteus maximus and gluteus medius can both aid in hip extension.

Now I am unsure what to teach, can anyone offer some insight into this?

#2

I think it’s fruitful for a teacher to accept what they are being taught AND also question it, but only when these two things are in balance. As we’ve seen here on the forum it is possible to run completely amok with anatomical references, double-blind studies, rationalizations and the like. And it is equally possible to blindly accept anything that crosses one’s path without any discernment at all. Each of the two examples above has a remedy to bring that person toward a balanced perspective.

In much the same way, only doing backbends this way or only doing them that way does not serve the student. For a beginning student who cannot comprehend or find certain actions in their body (yet) it may be appropriate to tell that student in some poses to “contract the buttocks” in order to protect their lumbar spine. An intermediate student does not need a gross instruction they need a fine one as they have, in theory, long since passed gross actions and are in the process of refining.

Muscles work in synergy they do not live in a vacuum. Furthermore I’d point out that anatomists and kinesiologists only see the movement of the human being from one perspective (not both) AND they do not know anything of yoga.

I’ll use tadasana as an example. Some teach the pose with the feet apart and the palms facing forward. This is the anatomical position. However it is not tadasana. So this illustrates a misunderstanding of the difference between an “appropriate anatomical position” and asana. For this reason most yoga anatomy books only fill half the bill - the second half.

So I would break this into two pieces.
The first is to NOT lump all backbends and all people into a box. Teach people not poses. Address that student in that pose at that stage of their development. That often takes a deep teacher-training (perhaps 2-5k hours) and a teacher with a propensity to both look and see.

The second component would be to focus on protecting the student’s lumbar spine (at least up through the T-L junction) in such a way that if they have appropriate actions in the pose then leave the glutes soft (as they should be). If they do not have those other actions then a responsible teacher would have them contract the glutes now to protect until such a time as they could do the pose safely without.

Does that help?

gordon

#3

Gordon,

Yes that does help, thank you. But I will ask for a little more clarification.

First I should say I am challenged here. I am teaching a very broad cross-section of students; from absolute beginners who are 70+ and quite inflexible, to young, healthy, attentive, dedicated, intermediate to advanced students. This certainly presents some challenge but not an insurmountable one… I am used to presenting postures in multiple ways and stressing the importance of being honest about ones capabilities and limitations.

I agree that there are no absolutes and stress this regularly, yet I guess I failed to do so with teaching this element of back bending. So you are saying that the beginning students SHOULD engage the glutes to protect the lumbar spine yea? And that more advanced students SHOULD not right? Can you tell me why you say the glutes are ultimately NOT engaged in back bends ( once a student is there) and do you feel this apply to all back bends? For example, I was taught that to achieve hip extension in sethu bandhasan (bridge) one should push into the heels, not engage the glutes. It also seems the lumbar spine is less suspect to injury here. Yet it seems a pose like anuvrittasana (standing back bend), the lumbar spine seems vulnerable and this is perhaps a time to engage the glutes to protect that lumbar area???

Now the gluteus maximus will cause external rotation of the leg, and that can prevent full hip extension, are you saying do this anyway to help protect the back or should one balance the use of the gluteus maximus with the hamstrings to help prevent the external rotation of the hip and leg?

Aloha, T

[QUOTE=InnerAthlete;55070]I think it’s fruitful for a teacher to accept what they are being taught AND also question it, but only when these two things are in balance. As we’ve seen here on the forum it is possible to run completely amok with anatomical references, double-blind studies, rationalizations and the like. And it is equally possible to blindly accept anything that crosses one’s path without any discernment at all. Each of the two examples above has a remedy to bring that person toward a balanced perspective.

In much the same way, only doing backbends this way or only doing them that way does not serve the student. For a beginning student who cannot comprehend or find certain actions in their body (yet) it may be appropriate to tell that student in some poses to “contract the buttocks” in order to protect their lumbar spine. An intermediate student does not need a gross instruction they need a fine one as they have, in theory, long since passed gross actions and are in the process of refining.

Muscles work in synergy they do not live in a vacuum. Furthermore I’d point out that anatomists and kinesiologists only see the movement of the human being from one perspective (not both) AND they do not know anything of yoga.

I’ll use tadasana as an example. Some teach the pose with the feet apart and the palms facing forward. This is the anatomical position. However it is not tadasana. So this illustrates a misunderstanding of the difference between an “appropriate anatomical position” and asana. For this reason most yoga anatomy books only fill half the bill - the second half.

So I would break this into two pieces.
The first is to NOT lump all backbends and all people into a box. Teach people not poses. Address that student in that pose at that stage of their development. That often takes a deep teacher-training (perhaps 2-5k hours) and a teacher with a propensity to both look and see.

The second component would be to focus on protecting the student’s lumbar spine (at least up through the T-L junction) in such a way that if they have appropriate actions in the pose then leave the glutes soft (as they should be). If they do not have those other actions then a responsible teacher would have them contract the glutes now to protect until such a time as they could do the pose safely without.

Does that help?

gordon[/QUOTE]

#4

Which elements would you most like me to concisely respond to?

#5

third and fourth paragraphs if you can… want to completely understand what you hinted at in your reply.

Mahalo, T

#6

I was taught at the Iyengar school to relax gluts during any back-bends (standing, bridge, ets) . That suppose to allow deeper backbends…but do u need it deeper? maybe your advanced young students do.

Try it yourself. Do the standing backbend and squizz your butt. and do with relaxed gluts. Feel the difference.

For older people I do supported bridge, supported fish…in the standing “backbend” I just tell them to reach with the hands and the heart up. reaching the heart up already givz you some backbend.

google Roger Cole, he is Iyengar teacher and he has very good workshop on backbends.

Safety first:) !

#7

[QUOTE=eddiespaghetti;55175]third and fourth paragraphs if you can… want to completely understand what you hinted at in your reply.

Mahalo, T[/QUOTE]
Well of course PARAGRAPHS. But that is not what I asked
I asked “elements”. Your third paragraph has five elements within it.

So I’ll just do my thing then.

Beginning students who cannot lift the bottom of their belly SHOULD contract their buttocks muscles in Bhujangasana once they have internally rotated the femurs.

Advanced students, when “advanced” means that the student has found the action of lift in the bottom of the belly and understands how to contract one things without contracting a seemingly needed other things, should keep the buttocks soft in Bhujangasana.

The glutes are not contracted in backbends because they can harden the pose, immobilize the pelvis, prevent descent of the sacrum, and jamb the sacroiliac joint. And NO nothing applies to all poses except maintaining the integrity of the pose for that student in that pose at that time.

You yourself have rationalized why the glutes are not engaged in your reference to achieving hip extension in Setu Bandha through rooting of the heels rather than contracting the buttocks. And yes there is less risk to the lumbar spine in Setu Bandha (a supine origin) as opposed to bhjuangasana (a prone origin).

Now the gluteus maximus will cause external rotation of the leg, and that can prevent full hip extension, are you saying do this anyway to help protect the back or should one balance the use of the gluteus maximus with the hamstrings to help prevent the external rotation of the hip and leg?
Yes to both.

#8

[QUOTE=eddiespaghetti;55061]More than once I have had yoga instructors say to not use gluteal muscles in backbending poses. Though I usually try to ask why, and understand what I pass on, this does not always happen. I trusted the sources and have also been telling my students to not use glutes in backbending, that it can hamper hip extension. I was also taught that the glutes can cause lateral rotation, so one is better off using the hamstrings in hip extensions.

Yet last week a massage therapist questioned me about this for she said the glutes can aid in hip extension. “Anatomy of Movement” agrees that the gluteus maximus and gluteus medius can both aid in hip extension.

Now I am unsure what to teach, can anyone offer some insight into this?[/QUOTE]

To be honest, if you’re not sure how a student can do an asana safely, then it’s best for the student to not teach the asana.

I was taught in Iyengar to ‘pivot’ from the mid buttock when doing a backbend. That way you avoid damaging the lumbar spine. We were told repeatedly to ‘access the tailbone via the buttock.’

If you can, do a back bend yourself using a strap in an Iyengar studio. See how it feels…
Also, downward dog with a strap, floating ribs in :wink:

#9

Mahalo for all input… I have, and will give consideration to it all, along with a very informative article I found on the subject at Yoga Journal online…

Much like most every other aspect of yoga, I see there is no clear-cut answer, different people, different disciplines offer differing advise.

Gordon, I appreciate your answers, and I know you asked for ELEMENTS. I wanted to get your opinion on all the ELEMENTS and thought it easier to simply list the two PARAGRAPHS than multiple ELEMENTS.

Terence, mahalo as well. I have studied Iyengar and I am familiar with the strap options you mentioned. Unfortunately the space I am working in does not currently allow these options for everyone and it is not not equipped like an Iyengar studio. (very few straps, none attached to walls. I actually brought 20-30 in once and most disappeared…)

Aloha, T

#10

Gordon has given about as comprehensive an answer as can be given, and he explains all elements of the body while in backbend very clearly. The difficulty, as a teacher, is first understanding how all of the parts work together - the functional anatomy - then being able to visualize it - to watch it happening in the bodies that are in your class.

It takes a lot of time, patience and practice watching students and the subtle ways that their bodies are different, as well as how well they are able to isolate muscles or groups of muscles without engaging others.

The area around the pelvis is a great example. If the student is unable to engage the lower muscles of the abdomen - the transversus abdominus and pelvic floor - without engaging the rectus abdominus and gluts, then you don’t want to encourage them to move into a backbend without engaging the gluts. They will need to activate the gluts to create the support they need for the lumbar spine, even though it’s not the most effective way to do it.

An experienced teacher - one who understands how to separate the ‘supportive muscles’ from the ‘power muscles’, and one who really gets what it means to active your body - and protect your body - in an effortless way, will slowly move students toward engaging the body in a way to encourage them to understand it too.

#11

eddie,

With respect, you are over-complicating this posture? Observe these two points and the posture will take care of itself:

  1. Begin with the feet as parallel on the floor as possible (overuse of the glutes being the result of outward rotation and the feet being too far apart). In other words, focus on the feet and never mind the glutes.
  2. Emphasize straightening the elbows. Period.

That’s it! Let the rest be.

[I]“Beginning students who cannot lift the bottom of their belly SHOULD contract their buttocks muscles in Bhujangasana once they have internally rotated the femurs.”[/I] - Gordon -

Gordon,

Just curious. How does one internally rotate the femurs and keep the heels together?

siva

#12

The heels do not remain together in bhujangasana for beginners in the practice as I teach it.
Therefore the short answer is “One does not”.

Howeverrrrr, to play with this a little further it is possible to rotate the femurs (both internally and externally) while keeping the heels together. It’s not relevant for this thread and the rotation available is only a few degrees at best. But since the femurs, fibula/tibia, and ankles are not fused to each other rotation can occur in the femur while maintaining stability in the ankle.

For anyone interested in following at home, simply stand up in tadasana with the feet together. Keep the inner heels wed, look at your knee caps, then internally rotation (opposite of Charlie Chaplain) the upper legs and watch the medial condyles of the knees get closer to each other.

Fun stuff! Enjoy.

#13

[QUOTE=InnerAthlete;55301]The heels do not remain together in bhujangasana for beginners in the practice as I teach it.
Therefore the short answer is “One does not”. [/quote]

That’s what I thought you said. Where did you learn to teach the cobra with heels apart?

[QUOTE=InnerAthlete;55301]For anyone interested in following at home, simply stand up in tadasana with the feet together. Keep the inner heels wed, look at your knee caps, then internally rotation (opposite of Charlie Chaplain) the upper legs and watch the medial condyles of the knees get closer to each other.

un stuff! Enjoy.[/QUOTE]

Fun stuff yes, except we don’t bear weight on our feet in cobra, so how does this compare?

siva

#14

Sive,

I think it’s fairly obvious where I’ve learned to teach, having read any of my posts over the years. And of course it should be pointed out that feet apart in bhujangasana is not the full pose, the final pose or the pose for those with an advanced practice. It is merely a safe way to teach the pose to beginners so that they do not damage the SI joint or compress the lumbar spine.

As for the second part of your inquiry, the relevance is the ability to execute the rotation in question. It was not a parallel between one pose and another. It was merely an anatomical response to an anatomical question based on the construction of that question WITH an included example for ease of digestion. <wink>

But I understand your undertone (I think) which may be that the weight-bearing in tadasana is a facilitator for the rotation in the way I outline it while bhujangasana has no such “leverage”. That’s would be a valid point. However it alone does not preclude a rotation in the femurs without a movement in the heels. It’s just a tougher action to master and perhaps too subtle to some.

#15

Gordon,

A very slippery cobra indeed.

I know this thread is not about cobra, but I get concerned when an over indulgence of detail often times confuses people: poses as authority or is sometimes used as a substitute for knowledge and understanding. I am not saying that’s the intention here, I think it’s just a matter of style, but to everyone out there studying with the variety of teachers they will encounter, and to all the newbie teachers too…greater detail does not equate greater understanding or experience, in fact sometimes it’s just the opposite.

But since we’re here, cobra is a case in point: heels apart in cobra allows one to over-extend and compress the lumbar and SI even further (which beginners tend to do in an effort to get as high as they can, using their arms), and is exactly why heels are held together from the start. Also if you’re “internally rotating your femurs” (even if you could hold your heels together while doing it), you are leveraging your tail and pubic bones off the floor, forcing even more curvature into the lumbar spine from the bottom-end, compressing the SI even more. No?

Heels together in cobra is the foundation of its strength, the safest and strongest way to build one and should be emphasized from the get-go.

No offense. Just a difference of opinion.
siva

#16

Interesting points and counterpoints, mahalo to all who contributed.

It makes me wonder though, yoga is a truly ancient art, and the knowledge of the body was very different then; so I wonder how have the academics, anatomists, physiologists and the like changed yoga? Perhaps Siva is correct, some are over-thinking, over-complicating yoga…

Not to suggest that they have not positively contributed to yoga, yet maybe have over-complicated it…and in that process have they forgotten that the physical part of yoga is merely one component of this art and not the art itself?

#17

[QUOTE=eddiespaghetti;55576]Interesting points and counterpoints, mahalo to all who contributed.

It makes me wonder though, yoga is a truly ancient art, and the knowledge of the body was very different then; so I wonder how have the academics, anatomists, physiologists and the like changed yoga? Perhaps Siva is correct, some are over-thinking, over-complicating yoga…

Not to suggest that they have not positively contributed to yoga, yet maybe have over-complicated it…and in that process have they forgotten that the physical part of yoga is merely one component of this art and not the art itself?[/QUOTE]

Strangely enough though Gordon is always reminding people on this board that the Asana is just a small piece of the yoga spectrum . We dont need to be afraid of refinement and knowledge just as we can also enjoy the simplicity both have their expressions , sometimes I love that detail it leads to profound openings , sometimes I let go of that and feel intuitively , its all positive . some times I read the yoga vashista , sometimes I look at the sea.

#18

[QUOTE=eddiespaghetti;55576]Interesting points and counterpoints, mahalo to all who contributed.

It makes me wonder though, yoga is a truly ancient art, and the knowledge of the body was very different then; so I wonder how have the academics, anatomists, physiologists and the like changed yoga? Perhaps Siva is correct, some are over-thinking, over-complicating yoga…

Not to suggest that they have not positively contributed to yoga, yet maybe have over-complicated it…and in that process have they forgotten that the physical part of yoga is merely one component of this art and not the art itself?[/QUOTE]

Interesting point. I read somewhere that in ancient India, yogis would spend a year or two perfecting one pose. Mountain pose every day for a whole year… Similarly in ancient China, a kung fu student would work on a basic stance for a prolonged period of time.
Modern people rarely have the time to work like that, and our mind set demands more variety. Few of us will ever construct a hut in the mountains in accordance to the Hatha Yoga Pradipika, for extended periods of sadhana.
Arguably, modern lifestyle has created more imbalance in the body, we have less time to practice, so perhaps its necessary to refine the physical element. But the danger lies in forgetting the goal of yoga, neglecting the other limbs.

#19

I have a friend who practises tai chi his teacher will give them one pose and they work on it for weeks on end , he is allegedly very skilled practitioner ie has powerful energy , but he has hardly any students because people cant understand or stay with the discipline , but he will not compromise people want form and variety , he is more interested into tapping into something more profound .
I think we have the time , we just dont have the wit .