Monday, June 22, 2015

yogas citta vritti nirodhah --slowing the fluctuations of the mind via the body...


Patanjali defines yoga in his second sutra, and states: “yogas citta vritti nirodhah” –yoga stills the fluctuations of the mind…  which is one definition of yoga, and one that we often don’t think of oddly, when we define yoga.  Whenever I ask a class to tell me what yoga means, the most common answer (and it IS a good one!) is that yoga means union, which it does, but it means other things as well. I would like to take a look at stilling the vicissitudes of the mind via the body.

Patanjali is referring to the process of meditation, or moving our attention inwards, so as to slow or stop the many different ways the mind has of jumping around from thought to thought. We can never really stop the mind from thinking –that is its job, after all, and to ask it to stop doing that is self-defeating. That doesn’t mean we can’t train it to be less “monkey-like” –flitting from thought to thought with little awareness of what it’s doing. In meditation, and indeed, in the recitation or singing of mantra, or even in the execution of asanas, we are offered the opportunity to allow the mind to slow down and focus. The key here is slowing down enough to learn to focus.

I am all for whatever brings people through the yoga door, so-to-speak. And if that is in a room full of hundreds of people, with loud music and heat, well, whatever! That sort of practice can be really beneficial to many people (not everyone, to be sure, but for many, already fit people, it’s a way in). That said, at a certain point, we all need to slow it down, start to pick it apart, and really pay attention to the movements being made, so that it becomes more of a deliberate meditation rather than an exercise class done to yoga music with some “yoga speak” in the background. Don't get me wrong --i love those classes; they're fun and challenging. But I know what I'm doing! And I've done the work. Years of it, in fact.

I know what I’m asking is difficult. It’s hard to move slowly; it’s hard to pay attention. But if yoga is anything –it is certainly about paying attention. I’ve heard many people going into or out of vinyasa classes, saying “I just need to flow today” –which I totally understand, sometimes your body just needs to move, and then the mind can start to settle (I used to run 7 miles to ashtanga vinyasa practice and then home –so I get it, I really do!) And I used to HAVE to do 2 hours of asana before I could sit to meditate. I was just not capable of sitting still until I had completely exhausted my physical body.

I still prefer to practice asana first, as I find that it does help to quiet my mind (and in working with juveniles at the detention center, they do much better when we can work out the heebie-jeebies first –then we do yoga nidra, which they love!) The point is: we need help getting the mind to settle. And one of the ways we can do that is to slow down the physical practice and really start to learn the postures. Similar to what happens in a Mysore-style classroom in the Ashtanga Vinyasa system, where a student is given each pose in the sequence one at a time, so she has time to really learn it. 

Interestingly, but not surprisingly though, most people don’t want to start at the beginning –so we have students with little or no yoga experience landing in challenging vinyasa classes where the only instruction they’re given is the name of the pose. This is fine for many people –they can probably sustain that for a while before they get injured from doing a pose in a way that is not suited for their body at the time –or even maybe ever! I’ve seen some headstands that would make anyone who knows anything about the spine cringe if not cry out loud. But again, try to take those students and actually get them to see that a fair amount of work has to happen before their body really should be doing said posture –well, they ain’t havin’ it. They want the big, sexy poses, and we, as teachers, let them.  Because we’re afraid that if we don’t offer the flashy, sexy stuff, they won’t come. And you know what –we’re right. Many of them won’t. I’ve had a lot of feedback from people who when they actually start instructing people in the correct execution of the postures for their bodies (“you need to do some work before you’re ready for that” to use our headstand  example –the shoulders need a fair amount of opening before bearing weight on the head can be done safely) are met with outright resistance, and then they just go to another class where they’re allowed to do what they want. I am in no way saying that we shouldn’t be teaching these poses –but the point is, they need to be taught!!  Calling out “come into headstand” is not teaching the pose, and unless we know every single body in that classroom and know that each one of them is bearing weight correctly through the vertebral bodies and not in any other way, we have no business using that pose in a flow sequence. 

I’m picking on headstand, but there are myriad other postures that also apply. “Pigeon” is another. Unsupported hanuamanasana another, pincha mayurasana another. The human body can sustain much abuse, but eventually –over time, the joints will suffer if these poses are not learned properly, and by that, I mean slowly, with attention and lots of supports if necessary. Now if we want to teach headstand, or pigeon, or any other posture that could be potentially dangerous for the joints, we can certainly do that –but it would necessitate stopping the flow of the class and doing what Patthabi Jois, and my friend and teacher Nicki Doane call “research”, which is essentially breaking the pose down into its components and preparatory movements to actually teach the body how to do the pose safely and appropriately for each individual. I’ll admit –this requires some knowledge of anatomy –and likely more than you got in your 3-week, 200-hour teacher training. It is our responsibility as yoga teachers to actually teach the postures. So you may need to get some more education to be able to really teach people those poses. Just because you can do it yourself, doesn’t mean you can teach it; and similarly, you don’t really have to be able to do each pose you teach if you can understand the basic structure of the pose and how it works in the body.

I guess I’m agreeing with Leslie Kaminoff in his call for a differentiation between those who have memorized a sequence and put together a playlist, and learned how to tell cool yoga-related stories while offering a fun flow, and those who are actual teachers of yoga. But no one wants to learn it the old-fashioned way. Or few do. Few in this culture of immediate gratification are willing to slow down, back up if necessary, and do the work! I was not born with my leg behind my head or balancing on my arms in forearm balance. It took YEARS of hard, persistent work –every damn day, before I could do any of that. Or at least in a way that could be described as yoga.

Yoga takes years. I’m sorry, but it does. And 5 years of practice is nothing. You’re still a beginner. Which is a good thing!! We want to maintain what they call in Zen practice "the beginner mind". Sure, some people are more in their bodies and can learn the poses safely and properly more quickly than others, but even they need to take the time it takes to learn the poses in a way that is integrated and, yes, yoga! Execution of “advanced” asanas does not a yogi make… nor does calling them out in a flow sequence make you a good teacher. Teaching them does.

To return to Patanjali and stilling the fluctuations of the mind –yoga is many, many things, and there are many ways to still the mind, but all of them require paying attention –if only to the fact that your mind is wandering again! We train the mind using the body –and the only way to really do that in a sustainable way is to do the work. Slow down and do the work. There are no shortcuts, I’m sorry to say. There are ways of distracting yourself to be sure, but there is no substitute for deliberate, slow, and attentive practice. But you know that already deep down inside. 

Monday, January 19, 2015

Why I Am Not Going To Stop Teaching Yoga...

This is not for those who don't like to read... it's long and a little painful!! But worth the read...


I'm not sure what to think -- i agree with a lot of it, but some of it stings --should only people who's ancestors practiced yoga be able to practice yoga today? (or any other spiritual practice that is not their ancestor's for that matter--not the exercise regime under the auspices of spiritual practice as it is mostly taught for sure). Not all South Asian's practiced yoga historically, and it is my understanding that Vivekenanda, Yogananda, Satcitandanda, and the others who brought yoga to the West all said that yoga would be reborn here; that it was dying in India, and they wanted to bring it to the larger world.... I'm sure they would roll over in their graves if they saw what parades as yoga practice today --and the commoditization of it, but is she actually arguing that we should remain locked into our own cultural heritage regardless of what that heritage offers us (or doesn't)?

What happens to someone who doesn't resonate with their spiritual/cultural heritage? --What are gay Catholics supposed to do? What if your cultural heritage doesn't speak to you in any way? Should Africans not be practicing yoga? Who gets to decide what cultural appropriation is in a system that is founded on adaptability and change --of both self and system? (And as a couple of my dear friends have pointed out --she's drowning in white guilt. Should I not eat pasta because I'm not Italian; can I not play the djembe because I'm not African?) Obviously not. All cultures shift and change and adapt, and this is not only no exception. Yoga is founded on change. That's what it's all about in a sense.

I'm not one who believes that asana is yoga --it's one very small part (which i know is rarely taught in the West) --but that said --i agree that we need to look at what we are teaching (as a yoga teacher and trainer of yoga teachers) --but the history of yoga itself is replete with upheavals in theory and change --that is one of the amazing things about yoga --it changes and shifts based on what people have needed from it over the centuries --it has changed and evolved and is not a monolithic entity.... the various schools of yoga exist precisely because everyone is different, and there are many doors in. Bhakti, Mantra, Raja, Hatha, Karma, Jnana.... they are all different paths to a similar end --freedom. I have no interest in going to a heaven where God is going to judge me for my sins... am i supposed to suffer through that system just because i didn't have the luck to be born on the sub-continent? She argues that everyone should research their ancestry and adopt a spiritual practice that is culturally appropriate. She points out that what we are doing to yoga is akin to what Christianity did to the ancient earth-based religions of Europe. What if that doesn't speak to you either? Are you really stealing something that was offered to you by those whose tradition it is? Vivekananda and company wanted to bring vedanta (his tradition of yoga) to the world:

Each soul is potentially divine. The goal is to manifest this Divinity within by controlling nature, external and internal. Do this either by work, or worship, or mental discipline, or philosophy—by one, or more, or all of these—and be free. This is the whole of religion. Doctrines, or dogmas, or rituals, or books, or temples, or forms, are but secondary details.  (Jackson, Carl T (1994), "The Founders", Vedanta for the West: the Ramakrishna movement in the United States)


My yoga practice is what keeps me sane, and teaching as well --I think we need to ask the questions --for sure. But am not sure i agree completely with her answers... but then, that's me --a white yoga teacher. Maybe it's my inability to deal with the fact that i have no business doing what i do. Am i left with my ethnic heritage's spiritual practice or no spiritual practice at all? I hear that some South Asians feel the west has appropriated their religious/spiritual identity and has changed it in an ugly way. I cannot argue with that. But I would also offer that the nature of yoga is change.

In no way am i suggesting that the way things are today are they way they should continue ---and as a white-privileged woman, I certainly can understand that some South Asians are horrified by what is out there as yoga --but I've also heard from some Indian students that they found yoga here in the West, and feel that they have been given access to something they wouldn't have had access to at home --and that it's being re-introduced into their culture that was largely letting it go, or had been encouraged/forced to do so by colonial British rule. Vivekananda spent much time touring India teaching, and trying to reintroduce his interpretation of vedanta to his homeland. He was a tireless social activist who argued that we need to work to end poverty first and foremost. Mahatma Ghandi added that he was among the reformers "who have maintained this Hindu religion in a state of splendor by cutting down the dead wood of tradition" (Parel, Anthony (2000), Ghandi, Freedom, and Self-Rule)

This isn't the first time that yoga (which has its roots in vedanta) has had a reformation of sorts --when Patanjali codified the yoga sutras (if he was indeed one person, which is highly unlikely) --it was in response to the disassociation of spiritual practice from the people. The priests set themselves up in a system that birthed the caste system --which they were at the top of-- --then Patanjali (around the same time as the Buddha) came along and said that people do not need priests to communicate with God or Spirit --it is accessible to each and every one of us -and you don't even have to believe in God necessarily to be free of the confines of material existence... it is available here and now. That's "classical yoga"

Then later in time --it became clear that people were unable to sit still and meditate; --which is what classical yoga practice is (our minds were too busy and unsteady) --and someone came up with the idea that we access and train the mind via the body --so along comes Hatha Yoga --the yoga of the body and the codification of asana. Asana is at this time only a part of a larger system designed to train the mind to meditate... not an end in itself.

And here we are --yoga is not what it was during vedic times, medieval times, nor even at the beginning of the 20th century. (As a matter of fact, what we know as yoga dates from the 1930's) --so what? Are we to dismiss it completely because it has departed from its origins in the Vedas? If that is true --then no one should be doing yoga. The rishis (the vedic "seers") took psychedelic plants, and journeyed --and came back and sang the Vedas. In most countries of the world these plants are illegal, thus unavailable to the larger population --and i have a feeling that even if we had access to those plants and medicines, that we have devolved spiritually so much that we wouldn't be able to hear the songs... at least that is the theory. The practices have evolved to meet the needs of humanity --and we have become so gross, that we need to be hit over the head with the grossest aspects of the practice to find the more subtle ones.

So --i guess I would have to argue --yeah --we need to smarten up our yoga --we need to study the history and place it in context. And you're not necessarily to get that at your local vinyasa studio --or gym, or even in a 200-hour teacher training. (You will find a lot of enthusiastic, loving souls though!) We need to do the work --and part of that work involves recognizing that we have adopted an ancient system and changed it. It is rarely "traditional" any more --and i'm not sure that's entirely bad. Not everyone has the patience to study it in this way, in this depth... i know this because my classes are small, as are my trainings. It's difficult. It is not an easy path --but as to the cultural appropriation argument against my even attempting it --what in this world remains the same? Do we really want it to? These are questions i'm asking honestly. I'm not saying it's okay to take a 2-week teacher training after having attended a retreat in Costa Rica and go out there and claim to be able to teach yoga--that is arrogant and frankly dangerous in some ways. (ok, maybe you're qualified to lead a class that you've memorized a script for, but I would argue (and agree with Leslie Kaminoff here) that you're an instructor, not a teacher). Having spent a large portion of my life studying the different systems of yoga --in depth, and with much effort, I have to say --i'm not sure I agree with someone who barely has scratched the surface of the larger yoga lexicon --and i'm not sure it's okay for her to tell me that I shouldn't be practicing or teaching because it's inauthentic and appropriating another culture's spiritual practices and history, of which she is fairly ignorant. Though to her credit --she at least knows that!  

She's right --she shouldn't be teaching yoga if what she knows as yoga is an exercise regime. To be fair --she acknowledges that her training was not all that --and has declined to further the illusion of yoga as exercise, which is good. But to stop practicing because she's afraid she's stealing someone else's spiritual practice is, in this instance, unfortunate. Vivekenanda and the others wanted to bring yoga to the world to help save humanity and integrate all religious and spiritual traditions. Again --i am in no way arguing that what we have today is what they envisioned. But I have to wonder if yoga is not more powerful and transformative than she is giving it credit for. In my experience, many people come in the door through the exercise regime (which makes sense --there is a vinyasa studio on every corner these days). But many of them become intrigued by something that goes beyond the physical. Yoga changes us. For the better. (Which is precisely why so many of us want to bring it to "underserved" populations!) I've seen its effects on kids in jail --it changes them, and I'm sorry, without going off on another tangent, it is our obligation as yoga teachers to offer this to whomever we can --whether in jails, in inner cities, or in countries where they've never heard of it before.  You don't have to go into those communities with the attitude that you're going to "save" anyone --all we do is offer what we have. Breath, movement, and self-inquiry. That's it. I'm not telling anyone to believe anything. I'm not saving anyone. I'm sharing what has helped me to become a better person and what has saved my life. I don't imagine that I'm responsible for saving anyone else. But if I can offer another person even a part of the peace i have found through my yoga practice, then i have a hard time believing that's a bad thing. I believe that even if all one ever accesses is the physical practices, that person is going to find more peace. Part of the beauty of the system is its accessibility. All you need is desire and a body in which to work. Desire to see and feel things differently --and this is universally available to everyone. Though we bow to the traditions that have brought us this far (Vedanta, Samkya, Classical, Tantra, to name just a few), we also accept that change is part and parcel of the deal. The original codifiers of yoga never argued that it was a system that was static. The nature of the philosophy was based on heated debate and adapting to changes in the human experience.


There are some authentic yoga teachers out there who offer a full understanding of what yoga is. Admittedly, they are few and far between. But they honor the tradition from which they came --which they were offered by their teachers. Yes, there have been changes. Again --yoga is all about shifts and changes, and I am unsure if that qualifies as cultural appropriation, or further indication of yoga's universality. I'm not saying that we are not appropriating the spiritual practices --we are. I'm not Indian. But I think when we are talking about spiritual (or even religious) practice - - the idea of separateness is the problem. The idea that one way is okay for one group of people and only that group of people, further separates us from our 'brothers and sisters' (as Vivekenanda greeted the world parliament of religions in 1893). Until all religions understand the universality of Spirit, then we will continue to be locked in a world where innocents are killed in the name of religion and spiritual hierarchy. As Patanjali argued --it is the mistaken identification of the larger Self with the smaller egoic self that is the cause of suffering. Our inability to see that we are ultimately all Spirit --that this life we live is one created by the ego's attempt to define itself as "all that" is what creates the suffering. Yoga takes on the larger problem of consciousness --and that knows no cultural boundaries. Consciousness is a universal experience that cannot be bound by dogma --whether Hindu, Christian, Wiccan, Muslim, or non-denominational. And those who brought yoga to the West were all about dismantling the barriers that keep us from realizing the true Self.


We need to listen --listen to those teachers who are still alive --who still maintain a tradition of scholarship and inquiry. We need to read all we can and learn about the history of yoga and its philosophy. We need to make sure that what we are putting out there is not just yoga-speak, new-age mish-mash. Read the Sutras. Read the Pradipika. Read the Gita. For that matter, read the Mahabarata and the Ramayana and the Puranas and the Upanishads! Read the Bible and the Quran. And do your practice --whatever form that takes. Spirit --God, if you want-- cannot be confined by the human experience or mind.

When Krishna says to Arjuna, 

You should know that My spirit is your soul. Your soul is the sprit of God in you... I am in everyone's heart, in everyone's memory, their wisdom and their thinking... the soul, the spirit of God in you, is real forever


he speaks to humanity --not just Arjuna. I'll keep teaching and practicing. To do otherwise would be disingenuous.