 |
| Bikram teaching |
Might find him disagreeable but I'm leaning towards his corner on the case that's going on at the moment and I really, I mean REALLY hate to side with big business against the little guy. I'm English, genetically designed to root for the underdog, except....
Come on, it's not about patenting yoga, it's absurd to suggest it is, disingenuous even, seems to be more about claiming intellectual property rights or copyright on a clearly defined series of asana in a very hot room.
I don't have sympathy for the fella who's teaching the same sequence in the same hot room but calling it something else so he doesn't have to pay anything back to Bikram himself and thus able to undercut the local Bikram studio and the teachers who are respecting their teacher.
Can't see how Bikram can make the case stick, what if you lower the temperature in the room a couple of degrees or change one of the asana. Still, teaching the same thing and calling it something else, if not actually asteya, doesn't strike me as right livelihood.
Teach something else, surely there are enough asana and myriad combinations to choose from.
but perhaps I'm missing something.
------------------------------------------------
Is Yoga religion
 |
| Picture from HERE |
So don't simplify it.
Supposedly it wasn't (theistic) back in it's early Samkhya days and then it was after the rewriting of the Gita when it became all about devotion. Then it wasn't again when it came West, all nice and scientific.
In the Ashtanga context Krishnamacharya and Jois were deeply religious men and that comes through in the practice, concepts of surrender, devotion, the language of the Gita coming through, of Śaṅkarācārya and Advaita.
My teacher, Ramaswami seemed to be suggesting that you could take the Ishvara line in Patanjali or leave it, that it was there for those who were religious, but that it wash't essential to Patanjali's method.
However, It's one thing to say you can practice you own religion or not be religious and do yoga, or at least asana but there's still the language, the underlying concepts on which that practice rests and is taught.
You may have come across a couple of posts here were I've questioned the concept of surrender or devotion, some feel very strongly that those are exactly what yoga IS about, that practicing asana without devotion, without surrendering yourself suggests your just practising gymnastics ( what does everyone have against gymnastics btw).
It's complicated, .......no? And that's without the philosophical hair splitting ( my old trade) on what does and doesn't constitute a religion but we know what we're talking about right.
My feeling is, Yoga is what you bring to it but that's a cop out, putting the whole question under erasure while I jump about on rubber mats and try and focus on the breath and gain some clarity of mind (something to be fair Kiki also mentions).
Of course I'm just simplifying it further.
Posts
8 comments:
John Scott's pre-amble on his primary series dvd, (sorry folks, Ashtanga again) cited, among other things, that it's a 'moral code'. Basically meaning (I think), caring about yourselves, others, and the World in which we live.
So, are religions' moral codes?
Not if you go by the dictionary:
"the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods"
But I sometimes wonder if dictionaries are always right.
At that point, my head exploded!
I guess I don't see yoga as religion or religious because I'm an atheist and a Buddhist? It's a practice that can lead to enlightenment, but that doesn't have anything to do with God(s). Maybe the heathen in me is just hopelessly obtuse.
I have John Scott's DVD and and book at home Steve, must have a look. Interesting if he suggests that yoga is a moral code rather than just that it has that as an element, yama/niyama's. It could work I think if you used it in the Buddhist sense of Sila, actions that bring peace.
I think I'm interested in the Krishnamacharya tradition and if the teaching is inherently religious due to his and Jois' devotional nature. I'm talking their yoga here not just the asana although come to think about it perhaps the asana and the way it's practiced has something of the ekstasis about it.
I'm an agnostic with Buddhist leanings myself Karen. I don't consider my practice religious and I avoid terms like spiritual and devotional because of the baggage they carry, I think I prefer to think of my yoga as a discipline.
I'm curious about the question though and a little obsessed with the idea of how it was first practiced in it's nontheistic samkhya guise.
no doubt we'll get accused of thinking about it too much. I think some have the idea that I do my yoga like Monty Python's Philosopher's football match. Not thinking about it while I'm practicing, honest.
Another interesting element to the 'religion' debate is that many church halls, in England, will not rent out their halls for yoga classes. Crib & stamp collecting don't have that constraint, so why does yoga?
Digressing a bit but, that's a real pity actually, because church halls are generally the cheapest rental in town. Many people have the potential to share what they know, but can't guarantee that they would cover costs if they have to rent sports & function halls.
It's a shame about the church halls, wonder how they are on pilates. perhaps it's the mysticism, the Church was never entirely comfortable with it's own mystics let alone anyone else's. Yoga as religion is complicated but there's a strong mystical tradition.
Time for practice.
I also think the church is uncomfortable with the mystical aspects of yoga. You're supposed to get a blissful feeling from praying/praising god, not from breathing exercises and body contortion. The fact that this state is more reliably reproducible through yoga than through praying may also be disturbing for religious leaders.
I sympathize with Gumucio, but does he really not alter anything in the series he teaches? My studio offers hot yoga. Teachers keep the main structure like Bikram sequence, but throw in a couple core exercises, downward dog and alternative cool down stretches. Isn't that enough to avoid the copyright infringement issue?
Hi yyogini Kind of wish I hadn't posted the first bit about Greg and Bikram, I'm sure Greg's a nice guy and has his reasons but for me it's not so much about avoiding copyright infringement issue as right livelihood. If you think Bikram style yoga is best and what you want to teach then why avoid the 'franchise fee'. But then it might be that he wants more freedom, i saw he does;t use Bikram;s script but then perhaps that's just to avoid copyright infringement. i don;t know the details which is why it probably wasn't fair to post on it.
And what about Ashtanga, teaching Ashtanga without authorisation, is it the same issue or different? I think different it's unclear whether it comes from Krishnamacharya, Jois the yoga korunta, Brahmacharya.... But primary is quite clearly defined as a practice. What about those who break away from AYRI and yet still teach Ashtanga exactly as they were when they were Authorised rather than going down the Power yoga rout. Too murky, not sure I want o go there.
Post a Comment