Progressing with handstand?

Yoga Discussion General Yoga
#1

Namaskaram,

I have recently built a deep desire to achieve a handstand in the middle of the room. I am able to do it near the wall but always freak out when i dont have a wall near me. Ive been able to move a little further away from the wall so that i could have some support if i lose my balance but not relying on it completely. Im wondering what the number one thing required to develop strength in, in order to master handstands and arm balances? i think i have the arm strength, and always figured i had quite a bit of core strength but cannot get into handstand without kicking up and allowing momentum to take me there. Any ideas or suggestions on how i can work on that? Blessings!

#2

Dear anahata,

Number 1 thing? Don’t give up.

There is a lot of technique involved. Are you in pike position or legs apart? Are you doing a good crow? Good hand strength?

I’ve written in past threads the way I do it and you could probably find it if you seach. That is, as you say, without momentum or kicking up. That’s very important. Good for you!

It’s all about rotation. You rotate inwardly in the upper-body, from the arms into the chest and abs, then outwardly into the tailbone and sacrum from the hip flexors, glutes and hamstrings. Also, visual that point where your feet are going to end up at the top. Try doing it with your head down and your neck relaxed. Find a focal point on your horizon, not looking at the floor. You’ll need your head and neck to be free once you get to the top to help you keep your balance. No holding your breath.

If I could see your setup, your hands and feet position, your breathing, your head position, etc., it would be easy to see what comes next. I’m in Richmond, I’d be happy to meet you sometime. Otherwise, just know that it is possible for you and keep working.

Peace,
Emil

#3

Hi Anahata,

Wow, handstand that’s impressive. I just wanted to clarify, by handstand you mean on the elbows with the head not touching the ground. If that’s the case I’m assuming that you have mastered the basic headstand?

#4

Two things.

One, if you are already doing Adho Mukha Vrksasana at the wall then it is likely you’ve already developed the “number one thing” for doing the pose.

Two, the musculoskeletal system is a synergistic system. Therefore there could not be a “number one thing”. :slight_smile:

#5

Namaste,

Thank you all for your responses.

Siva, great to meet a fellow Richmonder on here. I usually kick up to the wall. I do a very good bakasana but still have not been able to master Eka pada bakasana. Thank you for the tips

Mikesbytes, i was talking about a general adho mukha vrksasana.

InnerAthlete, i definitely agree. Ive been having trouble figuring out what im doing wrong. I fell a big thing thats standing in the way of me getting into a handstand is that i fear falling down.

#6

It is good to know those things (the fear, in this case)…then let them go.

While many make the poses about doing, accomplishment, achievement and the like, the foundation of asana is the experience for the practitioner. As long as you are exploring, discovering, and aspiring it makes little or no difference whether you do this pose or that pose either at the wall, in the middle of the floor, jumping up, or slowly rising through the engagement of the abdominals - presuming the doing is heightening your awareness and not doing harm.

So while this is a valuable thing to explore it is, at the same time a “so what”.

#7

[quote=AnahataAnanda;13848]Namaskaram,

I have recently built a deep desire to achieve a handstand in the middle of the room. [/quote]

Namaskar,

Slay the dragon of desire, which is in truth attachment and ego, and the rest will follow naturally. :wink:

#8

Pandara,

I respect and enjoy your posts which are generally conscientious and well intended, however in this context your statement is too fluffy to be helpful. Perhaps you may want to clarify.

As I undertstand it, the “desire” for action is not a dragon to be slayed at all, but rather is raja itself and is in this case the strength of Anahata’s spirit. The “dragon” is attachement to it’s outcome, or “fruit of that action” as Krishna puts it.

We have to distinguish non-attachment from non-action lest we fall into tamas and complacency. So to anahata or anyone out there with this kind of passion I would say, with the accomplishment of your handstand, say so what, but until then…YOU GO FOR IT! Because Arjun, nothing comes naturally without action!

Hubert, what do you think?

peace and love,

siva

#9

Dear Siva,

thank you for asking me to clarify and I would kindly do so. When awareness grows in one’s consciousness that desire is attachment, I find that it is replaced by something more beautiful and meaningful, namely motivation. Whereas desire lacks discernment or viveka, motivation carries inherently in it discernment and it has the power to lead one to non-desire, but calmly abide and allow yourself to flow naturally into what needs to happen (which is the action required), be it any asana or related yoga practice you want to do.

Anahata, by no means do I say you should not want to or have the desire to do the handstand, what I am trying to say perhaps is contemplate your motivation behind the desire, an asana doesn’t happen just on one level, i think you know by now that much more than just the physical aspect is involved.

Trust this clarifies it for everybody concerned and apologise if my initial response was “too fluffy”.

#10

Pandara,
I thank you for your reply. I agree that desire can sometimes lead to suffering because there can be attachment involved, however, i think i mostly side with Siva here. On a completely personal level, i feel that desire is what drives us to accomplishment. It is through desire that we achieve. I would like to know your approach to accomplishment through non-desire. Better yet, how do you discern between desire and motivation? How do you get motivation without desire?

#11

Namaste Anahata,

Desire remains, as you have pointed out as well, the main cause of suffering in our lives. I know it is difficult not to have desire, because what else drives motivation in us then? The simple answer for me is inspiration. That is how I discern between desire and motivation. For example I look at the teachings of Swami Sivanada and it inspires me, which is the motivation behind my spiritual life. Do I desire his life or to be like him? No, by no means do I want to be him or become like him, it just motivates (read also inspire) me to unfold in my own way.

So, instead of having the desire to do the handstand, ask yourself rather what inspires you to do the handstand? I am sure you will notice the difference.

#12

To answer Siva’s question: I often find myself performing actions out of desire. Usually, it depletes some of the momentum behind the action … why ?
Because most of the time, desire is built on subconscious impulses, and those impulses are much more powerful than our conscious choices. When we relize that behind an action, there is something what we don’t really know, that scares us a bit, and a part of us revolts. Consciousness revolts and says, I refuse to be the slave of some power I do not know.
THis is not yet realizing and surfacing the psychic energy of the action, it just relaizing it’s unknown origin. This makes it less powerful … but this is function of our level of awarness. Awarness changes during the day, under as effect of outer (sensorial) influences, focus shifts, so when awarness drops, the power of desire increases again. The real cause, some buried, hidden expereince, or a powerful archetype, usually is not recognized, or revealed.

I made this explanation in terms of psychoanalysis. This does not mean it is just as I wrote, but represents the process well.

The levels of subconscious, unconscious, collective counsciousness, as terms of this field, might just as well be seen as “entities” of a spiritual world. An archetype can be identified with an angel, or devi.
In a way, I like the traditional approach better, because it can be reconciled with the materialist science with greater difficulty, and that in my eyes, is a good thing. :slight_smile: ( I acknowledge scientific experiments and their palpable results, but I discard themain hypothesis’ they build on them)

The question is not if it’s good or bad to be under the influence of a certain desire, but where that desire takes us. There is a reason someone goes to yoga practice. There is a reason someone wants to perform handtsand in the middle of the room. The reasons can be many. Usually they are not that elevating motives as we would like to think. :slight_smile:
But this again is because we differentiate high and low … the lowest things in our life bear the signature of the greatest spiritual powers. We are the ones what make some of these shameful, misuse them, classify them as reproachable with our narrow minds.

Everyone is right. What for Pandara is inspiration, for another man it is just raw desire. For a saint, everything is sacred, and for a sinner everything is dirty. Personal karma unfolds by the power of the carried desires … it is vane to think that with our human mind and consciousness level, we are able to asess and quickly master our fate. It is a slow process, and most of it is scripted better than we are able to understand. For our benefit, I must add. :slight_smile:

#13

Namaste,

Pandara, that was a great explanation. Ive always struggled with the concept of desire=suffering because its hard for me to comprehend a life without desire. It makes total sense that desire has a final goal. Inspiration/motivation are just ways to progress. Im a little more clear on the idea now, however, it seems like a very difficult thing to accomplish, organically. How have you come to this realization?

#14

Pandara,

Would you also consider this one?

While I love the purity of what you say here, and believe with you wholeheartedly that non-attachment must be practiced together with asana, does one learn these together or separately? Are practice and learning the same? Can we encourage those who seek yoga to simultaneously question why?

Sorry if I cheated. To me, this is one question.

Om Shanti,

siva

#15

When we cling to only one answer, when there is only one "right’, when truth is perceived as absolute rather than layered and dualistic, we do not make enough room for yoga. It is this very position that is war. We cannot be for peace when we are, ourselves, only able to hold one position and insist it is “THE” way.

That having been said…

it is possible to confront attachment and deal with it (thus learning) at the same time as one learns asana. It is also possible to learn them separately.

Practice and learning are not twins, they are not identical, they are not the same. Each may contain the other. Each may exist absent of the other, no matter how sad that might be. There are many yogis who practice but learn nothing - evidenced over time by their lifestyle. There are others who learn but never practice at all.

Can we encourage those who seek yoga to simultaneously question why? Of course we can. Must we? No. It is not mandatory that the student know why they are seeking out yoga other than as an exercise of self-inquiry.

#16

Namaskar Gordon,

I bow before you, you have said what I would have, just not in the words I would have used.

Dear Anahata,

How I have come to this realization was the day when my own teacher told me to start to slay the many dragons of desire within me, which is ongoing as I still have a mind and ego, part and parcel of our reincarnation to this planet. :slight_smile:

Dear Siva,

Practicing, learning and I would like to add a third one, teaching, are all very much the same to me at this point of my evolution, for some it might be separate things. I see the three very much like the gunas, we fluctuate constantly between sattva, rajas and tamas, so do I fluctuate currently between learning, practicing and teaching, in other words there is no difference for me between them, they are inclusive rather than exclusive for me. However for somebody else there might be differences between them, as IA have also pointed out, and then that would also be appropriate for that person.

My own teacher emphasized that we should always enquire, should question why, so for me this was how I was taught and I respect my teacher from my heart for her teachings becasue it was and still is appropriate for me and her discipline helped me to unfold spiritually into what is apropriate for me. For somebody else this might be completely different, each one’s truth is different. This is my Truth. :slight_smile:

Swami Sivananda sums it up beautifully for me:

Enquire Who am I, know the Self and be Free. Adapt, adjust, accomodate.

Mokshamoolam Sivananda kripa.

#17

Om Shanti Everyone,

First we learn, then we practice. Is there another way? What happens if we do both at the same time? A mess of confusion. Here’s why.

If as a student it were possible to learn asana and non-attachment (or prathyahara) both at once, then why would they be so clearly defined and separate of one another? Why the eight limbs of raja? Why is hatha separate of prathyahara, separate of dharana and the others? Why not just lump them together, make them the same? For example, would you teach both concentration and meditation at once? Why not? How is that different?

We learn them separately, we practice them together, but why is this important? Because then it follows that teaching would be different from practice as well.

If you have a hotdog in one hand and an idea in the other, and you come across one who hungers, which do you offer first? Likewise, if one asks a question based in science, but you offer a lesson in ideology, what will be learned? And so it follows, if someone asks about hatha and the lesson is about introspection, there might be some confusion. (And it’s not just because I say so.) In other words, the student lays the ground for the lesson, by first being there, i.e., asking a question. They come to the teacher and not vice-versa. This is a basic fundamental of the guru kula and the path of yoga.

“Ive always struggled with the concept of desire=suffering because its hard for me to comprehend a life without desire.”

Pandara,
Do you recognize this? Anahata asks the same question here, almost verbatim, that Arjuna asks Krishna on the battlefield. Amazing! Timeless! And we are truly blessed to see this beautiful thing play out right here. I only participate now as a witness (ok, maybe trying to help a little and have some fun too).

Anahata,
Consider the difference between action, and the object or outcome of action? Until then, there is nothing to attach to. Desire, inspiration, motivation, call it what you will, this is mincing words. One’s intuition, passion, spontaneity as well, all these are without object. They are driven by spirit and there’s as of yet no “final goal," other than life itself. But from the “objects” of desire, and from the outcome or “fruit of action” we do seek non-attachment. Otherwise, we are left paralyzed. A subtle yet very important distinction in my view. (Ok, it might be a little rajasic too, but a guy has to live a little.) This is the Baghavad Gita: The Song Of Krishna.

Also, please note, I never said I didn’t love the fluff. I do, and I can lay plenty on myself, but it has its time and place. As teachers, we must be patient and answer questions as they come. And Hubert, you are always very interesting and challenging and I love trying to wrap my mind around you. This has been fun. I celebrate you all.

Peace,
Om Namah Sivaya,
Siva

#18

[quote=siva;13937]
“Ive always struggled with the concept of desire=suffering because its hard for me to comprehend a life without desire.”

Pandara,
Do you recognize this? [/quote]

Siva,

Yes I do, and if you go back to my posts you will see that I acknowledge it. :slight_smile:

#19

Ah, the venerable handstand :slight_smile: I feel that you have two questions here. One being what is necessary to master handstands, and two being what is necessary for PRESS handstands (handstands that don’t require kicking up for momentum, but a graceful movement into handstand). I’ll answer both as best I can.

Mastering handstand requires many variables, nobody will deny that. But in the end, the most important (in my opinion) is the fingers. We always start with the base, and in handstand, the fingers are what allow you to maintain balance. Watch anyone doing a long handstand and you’ll see their fingers constantly making micro adjustments. Or stand straight up on your feet and slowly start to lean forward. Notice what your toes do when you start to go too far. Your fingers must do the same thing in handstand. And that takes a LOT of strength and practice.

As for press to handstands, in acro yoga, we practice something called “press walks”. I feel that describing them will be difficult but I’ll try.

  1. Come into a SHORT down dog (I like to do this just to start. After your first press walk, you don’t do this again).
  2. Come onto your toes, walk your feet forward, keeping your hands flat on the ground, arms straight, and stay on your toes until your shoulders are well past your wrists.
  3. You should feel your core engage significantly, your fingers dig into the ground, and your shoulders taking a LOT of weight.
  4. Let momentum and strength of the core lift your toes off the ground then press through your arms and let your feet come back flat on the ground a few feet behind you. You MAY have to hop just a little for the first few weeks you do this.
  5. Bring your hands back close to your feet, let your shoulders go well past your wrists, and repeat the walk.

Do these backwards then forwards as many times as you want. They should be exhausting. In time, this should help you learn to position your body and build the strength for press handstand.

#20

I was just going to say master the headstand first at it will allow the core muscles to develop for your handstand. I believe if you have the arm and shoulder strength it is more or less developing core strength!

Namaste
inneravenue