Guest guest Posted April 5, 2001 Report Share Posted April 5, 2001 In the chart you referred to, those "entirely new asanas" represented by the figures in pink include the scorpion, which I'm sure you will agree is a variation of the headstand. Also included in pink is the head-to-knee pose and the tortoise, which I'm sure you will agree are variations of the forward bend. Also, included in pink are the wheel, diamond, crescent moon and pigeon, all of which, I assume that you will agree are variations of the back bend. Shall I go on? I don't know why you are being so difficult about this but I know that it has nothing to do with Satya. I will speak more on that below.<br><br>You agree that there is definite sequence of asanas and/or groups of asanas in the Sivananda approach and you agree that there is a definite sequence of asanas in the Ashtanga approach.<br><br>If a person is free to do any asana they like, in any order that they like, with or without any pranayama that they like, how can they be said to be following a Sivananda or an Ashtanga approach to hatha yoga? All that can be said is that they are practicing hatha yoga. Not a bad thing but not a Sivananda or Astanga approach. That was my original point.<br><br>On a somewhat different note, I feel I must comment on how you approach posts that offer opinions that differ from yours on topics that are important to you. You frequently mention satya and ahimsa, but going back over your posts since 1 March '01 I find that a frequent method that you use to comment on posts with which you disagree is to a attack the poster. Tactics that you use include blaming the victim, ridicule, rudeness, sarcasm, misrepresentation, argumentum ad hominem (circumstantial) or maligning a person's opinions because of their personal circumstances and agumentum ad hominem (abusive) or name-calling and similar acts. To attack people in manners such as these is not ahimsa. It is himsa. It is not satya. It is asatya-you are not being honest with their post or your reply. I find these tactics troublesome and unbefitting the otherwise sattwic nature of this board. <br><br>Your resistance to people having opinions other than those with which you agree and the way in which you express that resistance is abusive and tamasic. It detracts from any validity of the points you are trying to make and your vitriol is often so strong that it makes your post incomprehensible.<br><br>The second way that you attack posts with which you do not agree is to conduct a "divide and conquer" tactic. You chop the post into individual sentences and then do a 5-25 line free-association demeaning riff on selected sentences. This, of course, has several effects, none of which embrace satya or ahimsa: 1. Through selective editing, you misrepresent what the person has written. 2. By separating sentences by your responses the reader is distracted from the meaning of the post. 3. The length and strong language of your riffs overshadow the train of thought of the post. 4. your comments are often in error about what was said or simply consist of the vitriolic kind of statements mentioned above.<br><br>In future, please try to control your responses and show some regard for the person with whose opinion you are disagreeing. It is not the end of the world, if someone holds an opinion different from yours.<br><br>Om namah Sivaya Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2001 Report Share Posted April 6, 2001 your intentions are as clear as your postings are clouded. go in peace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.