It was with unexpected delight that I glanced through Yoga Makaranda to find the postures and vinyasa system popularised as Ashtanga Vinyasa Yoga, although with out reference to it as a fixed, formal system, presented visually, and mostly by a young and vigorous T. Krishnamacharya, though not in the case of those demanding a more extreme flexibility.
There can be little doubting the eminent role played by Krishnamacharya in the modern renaissance of yoga, both directly in India, and indirectly in the west, even if, as is claimed by some, his role was one of misleadingly blending east with west, yoga with fitness training.
Nevertheless, as I began to read the text through I found myself being dragged down into that dark hole of doubt as to what yoga actually is. I spent many years convinced that yoga, in whatever form or through whatever methodology, must express the principles and processes outlined by Patanjali in the Yogasutras: that it must be about internalisation of awareness into the subtle depths of cognition, perception and consciousness, about finding out, on the basis of deep, clear inner experience what and who we are, rather than making specific things happen by changing some of the things about us because we don’t like them. If not, I was sure, it could not accurately and fairly be called yoga, and i would certainly not support any such misleading name-calling.
Upon befriending the no less eminent, though less well know, Yogi Philosopher Dr. Peter Yates I found myself compelled to review that conclusion, and acknowledge it to be nothing other than my own prejudice.
Yet on reading this text and its hackneyed claims for yoga postures and pranayama as agents of physical fitness (page 8 second last line), somatic therapy (page 9 lines 1/2 and paras 4&5, page 50 and throughout the text), energetic manipulation (page 10 para 1 and throughout the text in reference to chakras, nadis etc), social enhancement (page 9 para 3) and psychological transformation (page 7 para 3 etc) within a spurious contextualisation of pop-psychology (page 6, last para etc), speculative neurology (page 7 para 3) and hand me down metaphysical philosophy (page 7 para 4, page 19 para 2/3, page 35 para 2 etc, etc), I found myself, once again, bristling with that same prejudice and objecting deeply to this comprehensive dumbing down, with such dogmatic speculation, of both human intelligence and the possibilities of yoga, even if this time from an eminent Indian guru rather than a media-savvy former dancer or marketing executive. Although I have to say I was relieved that there were no overtly religious references or proprietorial claims in this opening section.
The next section on the chakras plunged me deeper into the speculative metaphysics of subtle anatomy by which we have been relentlessly bombarded, along with its remarkable, and ridiculous, claims for the ability of pranayama to erase all physical disease and mental afflictions. As the text continued with further magical claims (page 14 para 3, page 16 para 3) and suggestions (page 36 para 2) and its implicit celebration of control as the key to yoga (page 7 para 3 etc etc etc), I found it harder and harder to bear with, or resist my prior prejudice against yoga being reduced to a systematisation of intention, effort, skill and accomplishment rather than being sensitive (ahimsa), honest (satya), open (asteya), intimate (brahmacharya), generous (aparigraha) self-enquiry (svadhyaya) into that which is actually happening (sadhana). Then the pictures of the guru stretching his body with what appears to my concerned eyes an interest in form over function, quantity (of movement) (figs. 4.7, 4.12, 4.17, 4.19 etc, 4.29-32) over quality (of action) (figs. 4.46-48, 4.29/30, 4.46) made it even more difficult to take this text seriously as anything other than evidence of cultural credulity and human self-deception.
May all beings ponder in peace, and pander as little as possible to the self-deceptive tendencies of human neurology and socialisation.
There can be little doubting the eminent role played by Krishnamacharya in the modern renaissance of yoga, both directly in India, and indirectly in the west, even if, as is claimed by some, his role was one of misleadingly blending east with west, yoga with fitness training.
Nevertheless, as I began to read the text through I found myself being dragged down into that dark hole of doubt as to what yoga actually is. I spent many years convinced that yoga, in whatever form or through whatever methodology, must express the principles and processes outlined by Patanjali in the Yogasutras: that it must be about internalisation of awareness into the subtle depths of cognition, perception and consciousness, about finding out, on the basis of deep, clear inner experience what and who we are, rather than making specific things happen by changing some of the things about us because we don’t like them. If not, I was sure, it could not accurately and fairly be called yoga, and i would certainly not support any such misleading name-calling.
Upon befriending the no less eminent, though less well know, Yogi Philosopher Dr. Peter Yates I found myself compelled to review that conclusion, and acknowledge it to be nothing other than my own prejudice.
Yet on reading this text and its hackneyed claims for yoga postures and pranayama as agents of physical fitness (page 8 second last line), somatic therapy (page 9 lines 1/2 and paras 4&5, page 50 and throughout the text), energetic manipulation (page 10 para 1 and throughout the text in reference to chakras, nadis etc), social enhancement (page 9 para 3) and psychological transformation (page 7 para 3 etc) within a spurious contextualisation of pop-psychology (page 6, last para etc), speculative neurology (page 7 para 3) and hand me down metaphysical philosophy (page 7 para 4, page 19 para 2/3, page 35 para 2 etc, etc), I found myself, once again, bristling with that same prejudice and objecting deeply to this comprehensive dumbing down, with such dogmatic speculation, of both human intelligence and the possibilities of yoga, even if this time from an eminent Indian guru rather than a media-savvy former dancer or marketing executive. Although I have to say I was relieved that there were no overtly religious references or proprietorial claims in this opening section.
The next section on the chakras plunged me deeper into the speculative metaphysics of subtle anatomy by which we have been relentlessly bombarded, along with its remarkable, and ridiculous, claims for the ability of pranayama to erase all physical disease and mental afflictions. As the text continued with further magical claims (page 14 para 3, page 16 para 3) and suggestions (page 36 para 2) and its implicit celebration of control as the key to yoga (page 7 para 3 etc etc etc), I found it harder and harder to bear with, or resist my prior prejudice against yoga being reduced to a systematisation of intention, effort, skill and accomplishment rather than being sensitive (ahimsa), honest (satya), open (asteya), intimate (brahmacharya), generous (aparigraha) self-enquiry (svadhyaya) into that which is actually happening (sadhana). Then the pictures of the guru stretching his body with what appears to my concerned eyes an interest in form over function, quantity (of movement) (figs. 4.7, 4.12, 4.17, 4.19 etc, 4.29-32) over quality (of action) (figs. 4.46-48, 4.29/30, 4.46) made it even more difficult to take this text seriously as anything other than evidence of cultural credulity and human self-deception.
May all beings ponder in peace, and pander as little as possible to the self-deceptive tendencies of human neurology and socialisation.