Article in Yoga Journal

[Guest guest]

I had previously read the book and I recently

read the article.<br><br>It did not come across as an

Ashtanga or Iyengar Yoga "slam" to me.<br><br>I have seen

a very old, black and white (1938, I think) video

of Iyengar and Krishnamacharya practicing.PK Jois

was not there, at least in the version I saw.Iyengar

is doing Ashtanga 3rd series postures, vinyasas and

all, with amazing<br>ease and grace.His flexibility in

that video (he is 18 yrs old) is unparalleled by any

practitioner I have seen today.<br><br>What does suprise me

about Anne Cushman's article is that that information

is being passed on as new.I guess, maybe it is, for

the less well read Yoga practitioners.<br><br>Yes

Krishnamacharya "made up" a lot of the series,it was not handed

down to him by the gods.Yes, Iyengar went off on a

tangent from what he was taught and if you study his

contributions on form and alignment your practice will be

amazingly enriched.Yes, other Krishanmacharya students who

teach Ashtanga teach differently than PK Jois and it's

not just a matter of style.Yes PK Jois himself has

significantly altered the series in content and sequence during

the years.<br><br>Let me give a small example just to

illustrate what I mean by that last sentence.David Swenson

has been one of the first and foremost Ashtanga Yoga

teachers and practitioners.If you look at Betty's homepage

at www.ashtanga.com you will notice that as per PK

Jois's request D. Swenson has been excluded from the

recently created list of certified Ashtanga Yoga

teachers.David started Yoga when he was 13 (1969),was introduced

to Ashtanga by David Williams in 1973 (who I think

is the first westerner who studied with PK Jois) and

first visited Mysore in 1975.David was told by PK Jois

that he learned the entire system when he was

there.David has all the series asanas on paper, as they where

taught to him at he time.The handwriting belongs to

David's teacher PK Jois.And guess what, the series have

changed in substance,asana sequence and number.And now

the 6th series will be taught only to Sharath, who

will be the inheritor of the system.<br><br>New

light?Suprising evidence? Not really.The evidence has been around

for years, but the Western mind (the grass is always

greener, especially in the magic,saintly country of India)

has not seen fit to shed light upon the obvious

truth.<br><br>But, so what?It's only hatha yoga.It's only supposed

to get you ready for the next limbs of

Yoga.(pranayama,pratyahara..) Yes, I know that it only prepares most people for

the Contortionist Olympics.Dharana,dhyana,samadhi

these are the ultimate goals and they don't change

except in name,throughout

time,cultures,countries,religions or traditions.

[Guest guest]

I have not read the article in Yoga Journal -

however I have seen the 1930s film mentioned,<br>read the

Mysore Palace Yoga Book & BKS

Iyengar's<br>autobiography. <br><br>I agree with javra's post that there can

be nothing new in what is said in the article and

it<br>is no attack on the Iyengar or Ashtanga methods<br>-

it dose however I guess debunk some popular

<br>mythology which is often sold second or third hand<br>to

new students. Much of yoga is PARAMPARA (sp?)<br>but

its essential to differentiate between the baby and

the bathwater. <br><br>NAMASTE<br>narian2000

[Guest guest]

I just read the article, and am now rather

interested in reading the reviewed book. I think some good

points are made in the article, and like the others who

have replied here, I don't really think it does come

across as a slam against Ashtanga/Iyengar yoga. In fact,

if these styles work for you in your practise, does

it really matter if they are thousand-year-old

traditions or whether they were developed by an innovative

yoga guru in the last century?<br><br>I am currently

working through 'The Heart of Yoga: Developing a Personal

Practice' by Desikachar, and the idea of a customized yoga

practise for an individual makes a lot of sense to me,

which may be affecting how I view the article in

question. On a slightly different thread, has anyone else

here read this book? Any thoughts on it? <br><br>PG

[Guest guest]

I found the article interesting, and the

discussion around it. I didn't see it as a "slam" against

twentieth century hatha yoga styles.<br><br>I've always

found the "ancient manuscript found by Krishnamacharya

and then lost again" story pretty implausible, and

frankly it doesn't matter to me or have any bearing on

what my astanga practice means to me.<br><br>I see an

interesting parallel with karate, which I studied for several

years before astanga yoga became my main practice. In

the martial arts world nobody has any problem with

the fact that many of the major Japanese schools as

they are currently practiced - karate, aikido, judo -

are well documented inventions of the last hundred

years or so. These particular forms of practice are

still capable of giving the same spiritual benefits of

humility, discipline, stillness of mind as other forms that

go back hundreds or thousands of years - if the

practitioner approaches them with the appropriate frame of

mind. Most people start off approaching them quite

differently, for self defence, fitness or as competitive

sports. Some change their attitude and their view of the

path they are on in the course of their practice. I

see the same thing happening with the way people

approach astanga and iyengar yoga.<br><br>I really don't

care whether what I do when I get on my mat and

practice is something people have been doing in the same

form for thousands of years - unlikely, in my opinion

- or something that Krishnamacharya and Pattabhi

Jois put together a few decades ago - more likely, in

my opinion. I enjoy trying to do the astanga series

and yes, I do get some ego gratification from

(sometimes, slowly) getting "better" at the outward gymnastic

aspects of it. I think that's harmless, I don't go around

believing that it somehow makes me superior to people who

can't do those things. From a purely physical point of

view I'm also confident that astanga practice is

slowly undoing some of what I thought was permanent

damage I did to my body through years of martial arts

and other sports. But those things are

secondary.<br><br>What really matters for me is learning that it doesn't

matter, that what I'm doing is the practice for its own

sake not something directed towards a goal. It's about

humility, singleness and clarity of mind, non-attachment to

goals and outward achievements. I think astanga yoga is

one excellent way of approaching these things through

a physical discipline, but I'm sure there are

others and I don't see why it should matter to people

whether their outward forms are new or old. That doesn't

change what they are about if approached with a

particular attitude.

[Guest guest]

Alan, <br><br>Well said, about why we do yoga,

and the benefits<br>we want to get from it.<br>"It's

about humility, singleness and clarity of mind,

non-attachment to goals and outward achievements. "<br><br>I

suppose my logical mind didn't believe in <br>'the found

manuscript' but the alternative to<br>this is that

Krishnamacharya and Jois made it<br>up ( or significant parts of

it ).<br><br>The problem my 'spiritual' side has

with this,<br>is that this means that those guys must

have<br>been pretty amazing ( god-like ) to create such<br>a

perfect practice.<br><br>Basically if it's just 'made up'

this century,<br>and not really that widely practiced

at all,<br>then the practice can't be

perfect.<br>Which I suppose is another lesson in goals

you<br>mentioned above, which is doing something just<br>for the

sake of it, and for no other reason.<br><br>Ashtanga

yoga has helped me a lot. But it was<br>kind of nice

pretending there was something<br>really deep to

it.<br><br>Liz