Is yoga actually for men?

Why is it that yoga seems to be almost exclusively a woman's thing these days?

I don't really feel like typing anything new today, so I'll just quote myself from that other thread.

So, is "a" strictly for the feminine gender? I mean, if we’re looking at the last three or four instances...
For thousands of years, yoga was an exclusively male pursuit, wasn't it? Then along came this whole new age movement and changed everything.
Ever since the trends started shifting back in the seventies, that particular image has just stuck around.
It’s all just old-school yoga, really—intense, physically demanding, and the kind of workout where men just go all out.
What kind of trouble am I actually looking for?

It’s funny how, even now, the heavy hitters in the yoga world are still almost exclusively men. Why does that keep happening?

Pathabi Jois—basically the ultimate authority on Ashtanga, straight out of India.

David Williams and David Swenson are pretty heavy hitters in the yoga world—both highly respected practitioners who actually studied under the legend himself, Joe))), and you can tell.
They’re arguably among the most influential figures when it comes to bringing the practice of Ashtanga yoga into the American mainstream.
Just as B.K.S. Iyengar’s "Light on Yoga" is widely regarded...
Is Swenson’s "Ashtanga Yoga" basically the Bible for yoga practitioners? Or am I just overthinking it?
Can one really consider "The Practice Manual" anything less than the absolute bible for Ashtanga Yoga?

John Scott—an American Ashtanga yoga instructor who also studies under Jois.

Iyengar was a student of the late Krishnamacharya—who most people consider to be the absolute greatest to ever do it.
He was a titan of the 20th century. He lived to be 101, and really, the only reason he didn't make it past that milestone was because someone decided to poison him.
Iyengar used to work with Vinyasa sequences back in the day, but eventually, he went his own way and founded his own method.
She developed her own signature style of Iyengar yoga—a practice that remains a staple in studios today—built upon...
With various tools like building blocks and other implements at our disposal, we can actually assist people of all different backgrounds and needs.
Is physical performance really just about being able to wedge yourself into certain yoga poses?
His book, *Light on Yoga*, is basically considered the yoga bible.
Since there are over 500 pages covering nearly every single position imaginable, does anyone actually expect us to find anything useful in here?
Some are easy enough to reach, while others require years of grinding just to get within striking distance. It’s all about the steps you take to get there.
How exactly does one go about extracting them, what are the actual health benefits involved, and can we get a comprehensive breakdown?
There’s always some heavy theoretical justification behind everything, isn't there? Regardless, the man is 88 now and still hits the gym three times a week.
How many hours a day?

Paulie Zink is the founder of Taoist Yin Yoga—essentially the direct opposite of the more aggressive Yang style—which focuses on...
If you hold those positions for four or five minutes at a time, you actually end up maximizing the stretch.
Connective tissues—basically bypassing the specific muscles targeted in Ashtanga. It’s actually quite well-known.
So, we have a master practicing some sort of Drunken Monkey Kung Fu style. Is this actually happening?

Paul Grilley is arguably the single most influential figure when it comes to bringing Yin yoga into the mainstream.

Andree Lappa—originally from Russia—is the founder of Universal Yoga, a practice that’s notoriously intense on the body.
And then there's the whole argument for taking a more data-driven approach to yoga.

....
Look, I could probably list another fifteen or twenty guys for you if I really wanted to, but there’s honestly no need. That was my point.
Does the fact that there's a decent number of guys in yoga classes mean they somehow deserve more credit?
Is there really a need to gender today’s yoga sessions?

It’s hardly a coincidence that Hatha Yoga has been making such a massive comeback lately, wouldn't you agree?
There are those in India claiming that "Hatha" actually translates to force or violence. Is that really what they're aiming for?
It should symbolize her impact on the human body—as if she needs to be truly extraordinary.
You need serious strength and endurance to survive those kinds of rigid training regimens. Honestly.
Was that really the primary reason women just didn't bother with yoga until recently?

Yoga in the States has become a bit watered down lately, hasn't it? But I suppose if you're willing to put in the work, you can still find something worthwhile.
Working under these exact same conditions... what is it you think you're seeing? A bunch of old ladies running around aimlessly, perhaps?
You see these women heading off to yoga classes and you can't help but think, "Well, if they can manage that, surely I can handle it too, right?"
I’ll put this in terms of running. Anyone can go out for a jog. But we aren't really talking about ability here, are we?
It’s not about the distance you cover, but how you actually run it. What good is someone grinding out five kilometers in two or three minutes if they’re just flailing through the motions?
An hour? By the time you actually get out there and give it more than 20 or 30 minutes of effort, you'll have already outpaced her.
First place in my last three runs. It’s the same deal with yoga—you hold one pose, if you can actually manage it.
It’s a matter of will. You can dive in so intensely that the sheer amount of grit and energy you pour into it becomes... well, everything.
It’ll be larger than whatever someone else manages to scrape together across five different positions. How much are you actually putting in?
It’s only a matter of time before you come back around. That’s exactly why they say yoga is for everyone.

That’s exactly why I suggested Ashtanga to everyone who isn't interested in those diluted, watered-down approaches to yoga.
It actually retains that ancient, traditional essence where, once you've finished the intense strength and
endurance work, the practice seamlessly integrates meditation and full-body breathing exercises.
This leads to much better breath control, sharper focus, and improved lung capacity,
offering us Americans a holistic way to train that doesn't just stop at the physical level.

Women practice Yoga, while men are Yogis.

Ashtanga Vinyasa is just athletic Yoga shaped by Westerners... probably carries the least authentic spirit of any style out there (not counting Bikram)

shadowgardener12 said:women practice yoga, while men are yogis.

Ashtanga Vinyasa is just some athletic version of yoga shaped by Westerners, making it the least authentic style out there—if we aren't counting Bikram.

?

A woman practicing yoga is a yogini.

Ashtanga was actually developed by Krishnamacharya and his student Jois, who were pureblood
Indians, whereas Westerners like Williams and Swanson merely passed it along and
perhaps added some minor tweaks, though nothing drastic.

The term "Ashtanga" itself translates to eight limbs, because it consists of eight distinct stages or
limbs, which are:

1) yama - external ethical principles such as non-violence and honesty,
and so on.

2) niyama - internal disciplines like contentment, self-reliance, introspection, and cleanliness.

3) asana - all the physical postures practiced.

4) pranayama - the expansion of breath through conscious control of inhalation and exhalation
using various ratios and holding energy locks (bandhas).

5) pratyahara - the withdrawal of the senses, aiming to shift focus
from the outside world to an internal mental state.

6) dharana - concentration.

7) dhyana - meditation.

8) samadhi - union with oneself by emptying the mind through
meditation, reaching a higher state of consciousness or enlightenment.

And theoretically, this aligns perfectly with the authentic spirit of yoga, which has always
strived toward enlightenment and freedom through self-realization.
I originally thought Ashtanga was physically closest to the authentic
spirit of Hatha yoga simply because of how grueling the physical practice is.

Ashtanga Vinyasa follows the exact same principles as Ashtanga; they've just added
transitions (vinyasas) between the asanas to create one continuous flow.
At its core, it is all Ashtanga.

So now I’m wondering what you mean when you claim Ashtanga Vinyasa is purely
athletic yoga and lacks any authentic spirit? Do you actually understand
what Ashtanga is in its entirety? Because the way you're framing it does a
massive injustice to the practice itself. If you're only doing the asanas,
then you aren't actually practicing Ashtanga. Of course, it would be silly to teach everything,
like the ethical and moral codes that should have been learned elsewhere, but any
decent Ashtanga Vinyasa class ought to incorporate
pranayama and meditation. After our ninety-minute session, we always finish with five minutes
of pranayama and ten minutes of meditation, ensuring we have a complete system.

Ashtanga Yoga and Ashtanga Vinyasa Yoga are two totally different beasts.

Real Ashtanga Yoga comes from Patanjali’s Yoga Sutras. It’s a philosophical and psychological framework rooted in Samkhya.

Ashtanga Vinyasa Yoga only uses the name "Ashtanga" to claim a connection to Patanjali, but they don't actually practice his teachings.
They mostly just do moving Asanas, some Pranayama, and a few Bandhas... which is all basically Hatha Yoga. That "Ashtanga" in the title is just branding; it has nothing to do with Patanjali's work, and it just confuses people.
But since Patanjali is cited as one of the founding fathers—the first guy we actually know by name who defined the philosophical side of Yoga—every yogi in the States feels the need to reference him, whether they follow his teachings or not. His ideas are more or less baked into various types of yoga anyway.

What you do after an Ashtanga (Vinyasa) session is really just what athletes call "cooling down." It's a relaxation phase because you've already worked up a massive sweat.
I hate to break it to you, but it honestly has nothing to do with meditation :| 🙂,
Just my two cents, though.

The fact remains: there's no real link to Patanjali’s Yoga Sutras. He barely defines Pranayama—only once in a single Sutra—and he mentions Asana just once, describing it as a comfortable, steady position.
So even Hatha Yoga doesn't have a direct line to those Sutras, even if everyone tries to align themselves with them.

And Krishnamacharya didn't exactly "found" Ashtanga Vinyasa Yoga, because that wasn't what he was teaching. He taught both Iyengar and others, who practiced a completely different, strictly static style. Both of them had the same teacher. Krishnamacharya taught them a physical style common in Southern India, and then each student added their own personal flair.
The Vinyasa/flow elements in Ashtanga were added later by restless Westerners, like someone out of a Silicon Valley startup...
There. Now you know a bit more about the actual mechanics than your teachers probably told you. 🙂
The full truth about Ashtanga Vinyasa and a little bit on Iyengar Yoga. 🙂

So why is it all guys doing Yoga while women just... don't? Just look at Josh Jenput’s list. Is there even a single woman on there?

Alright, let me start with what really stuck in my craw regarding this issue.

-------------------
Krishnamacharya couldn't have just "invented" Ashtanga Vinyasa, because that wasn't actually what he was teaching back then.
--------------------

Here are some links that might show you that you aren't quite hitting the mark.

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sri_T...rishnamacharya

"Because many of his students at this point in his life were active boys, he developed a vigorous style of yoga aimed at building strength and stamina that is known today as the popular Astanga Vinyasa."

2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashtanga_Vinyasa_Yoga

Take a look at what it says on the page.
"Founding Guru: 'Sri Krishnamacharya', Satguru of Sri K. Pattabhi Jois"

3. And here is a link that pretty much confirms everything; you can see Iyengar in his younger days under the watchful eye of
Paskam Krishnamacharya, practicing the exact Vinyasa sequences that Krishnamacharya taught him.
It was only later, around his 40s, that Iyengar moved away from the Vinyasas for health
reasons, shifting focus toward an approach that emphasizes
precise execution and perfect postural alignment during
the movements.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmOUZ...elated&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BADX...elated&search=

4. You also have the book by Krishnamacharya’s student, Srivatsa Ramaswami, titled
"The Complete Book of Vinyasa Yoga: An Authoritative Presentation, Based on 30
Years of Direct Study Under the Legendary Yoga Teacher Krishnamacharya." The title
speaks for itself. The only difference is that Ramaswami refers to his teacher's method as Vinyasa Krama.

http://www.amazon.com/Complete-Book-...e=UTF8&s=books
----------------------------

Look, there's more than enough evidence to suggest you're mistaken. Ashtanga Vinyasa originated
with Krishnamacharya, not from some restless Westerners as you claim, so
both Ashtanga and Ashtanga Vinyasa are incredibly closely related systems—it's highly unlikely
that Krishnamacharya, arguably the greatest yogi of the 20th century, would stray from his core principles
just to invent a whole new type of yoga. So, consider this a little course correction on the facts.😉

Moving on.
------------
What you guys do after Ashtanga (Vinyasa Yoga) is essentially what athletes call a cool-down or a relaxation phase, since you've already worked up a massive sweat.
I hate to disappoint you, but that really has nothing to do with meditation. 🙂,
But hey, that's just my take.
-------------

The instructor has about seven years of experience with TM meditation, and
he'll be leading a ten-hour seminar dedicated solely to the topic soon. I can
say with absolute certainty that it is meditation. Plus, he's completed his studies in Indianology
and actually teaches it at the university level, so it's unlikely either of us will end up knowing
more than he does. =)

Regarding the discussion about Patanjali’s sutras and the supposed lack of information
on pranayama and asanas—and the argument that because of this, neither asanas nor pranayama are
part of the true spirit of yoga—that logic only holds water if you assume
Patanjali’s sutras are the sole, definitive essence of yoga. But that is easily explained by the fact
that yoga, like all things, has evolved and expanded over time; or perhaps
Patanjali simply didn't want to spend his time cataloging every single physical posture,
which is why it was later supplemented by works like Swami Svatmarama’s Hatha Yoga Pradipika. I mean,
do you honestly think Patanjali achieved the level of physical conditioning required
for his intense mental and psychological explorations
just by sitting in one comfortable, stable position, as
you defined it? The same applies to pranayama. The only clear distinction is that Patanjali’s Raja (Royal)
yoga aims for kaivalya—total liberation and freedom from the cycle of
reincarnation—and those who practice it are often bhakti (devotional)
yogis, incorporating various mantras dedicated to a specific deity. Meanwhile, the goal of a Hatha
yogi is to open and stimulate the flow of prana energy through the chakras,
with the ultimate aim of reaching the crown chakra (sahasrara), which is actually better understood
not as a single chakra, but as the convergence of the other six, where one should
realize the absolute self, the very essence of being. However, these goals are largely a matter of
personal choice; even Krishnamacharya, despite being an adherent of Ashtanga/Hatha
yoga, was a fervent bhakti yogi, proving that the two paths
are by no means mutually exclusive.

As for our Western needs, I believe Ashtanga is a perfectly sufficient system, focusing on asanas, meditation, and pranayama.
While something like chanting the sacred syllable Om or invoking deities like Brahman or Vishnu
carries heavy religious connotations that don't necessarily resonate with our American mindset
or our general cultural beliefs, it isn't strictly necessary for us. Still, it is always beneficial
to understand the context of what is happening.

--------------
And why is it that male yogis get all the credit while women just "do" yoga? Just look at your own list; is there a single woman on there?
--------------

Haha, well, I wrote that list specifically to address the topic of whether yoga is just for women,
so I could prove the opposite; that's why there aren't any women listed. But you have a point
in noting that most major historical milestones were achieved by men. On one hand,
this could be due to the sheer intensity of Hatha yoga, which was historically
more suited to the male physique, but on the other hand, a more relevant reason exists:
traditional societies were deeply patriarchal and often prevented women from excelling
in various pursuits, including yoga. However, as society becomes more progressive,
we are seeing a growing number of highly skilled female instructors,
and their numbers will undoubtedly continue to rise. Since we were discussing B.K.S. Iyengar,
I should mention that his daughter, Geeta, is also a world-renowned yoga teacher.

The Krishnamacharya link above isn't actually doing Vinyasa at all. It’s just a more physically demanding version of Hatha for practitioners—basically advanced Hatha Yoga, which any regular Hatha yogi does.

I’ve been doing comparative studies on the Yoga Sutras and other variations for about six years now. I won't sit here and claim, "everything is explained, so we’ll just introduce something ten centuries later..." If you're actually living by the principles of the Yoga Sutras, you barely need much Hatha Yoga at all. And that’s really the point of Hatha—restructuring the energetic field, clearing out blockages. Hatha was originally just a set of cleansing techniques. Later, asanas from various Upanishads were added, and then everything was further developed in the Hatha Yoga Pradipika.

Once those blockages are cleared (and they start on the mental plane first), there’s no longer a need for (that much) Hatha Yoga.
Patanjali takes a different route. He goes straight to the root, to the mental causes of those blockages. It’s the harder way. Direct.
That’s why Hatha exists—it’s the easier path. It works through the body, then the energy, and finally reaches the mental plane.

So, the Yoga Sutras and Patanjali had a completely different approach than Hatha. In Patanjali's Sutras, you don't even need Hatha Yoga as such. The emphasis there is more on an intellectual-psychological approach and its core principles. Principles that are incredibly hard to stick to. There's zero need to force Hatha Yoga into the Yoga Sutras; it's a closed system based on its own principles (linked to Samkhya). Sure, you can try to introduce whatever you want and argue that you need certain things to achieve certain results... but let's be clear, that’s not what Patanjali is talking about.

There are plenty of other Yoga variations that don't require Hatha either. Jnana Yoga, Laya Yoga, etc. You can combine them if you want, but it has nothing to do with those specific systems. Just like the Yoga Sutras have nothing to do with the Hatha Yoga Pradipika.

And there’s especially no need to introduce something like Ashtanga Vinyasa, which is essentially yoga in motion. The Yoga Sutras clearly state that yoga happens when everything settles—when all movement stops (in the mind). Ashtanga Vinyasa doesn't achieve that; instead, it creates new whirlwinds because it exhausts you physically like a sport, while simultaneously raising your energy through asanas, bandhas, and Ujjayi breathing.

Don't get me wrong. I've been practicing Ashtanga Vinyasa since '99. I started with a friend of Swenson's and studied under various teachers in Mysore. I still do it today. It's great for activating energy and staying fit—way better than a standard gym workout—but it has the least in common with what Hatha teaches. It only has as much connection to the Yoga Sutras as you choose to inject into it... but they remain the Yoga Sutras regardless. You could just as easily work them into an art class as you could into Ashtanga, assuming you even bother to include them.

------------------------
The link above suggests Krishnamacharya wasn't practicing Vinyasa at all, but rather just a more physically demanding version of Hatha—essentially advanced Hatha performed by any serious practitioner.
------------------------

Look, if his own biography identifies him as the primary founder
of Ashtanga Vinyasa, and if the historical record of Ashtanga Vinyasa itself credits
him as the pioneer—especially since Iyengar developed a connected sequence of asanas that remain
staples in Vinyasa Ashtanga today—and considering that one of his students,
who practiced alongside him for over 30 years, explicitly states that Krishnamacharya practiced
Vinyasa (Vinyasa Krama) and wrote an entire extensive book based solely on his
teachings, while other books also recount how Krishnamacharya was a follower of
Vinyasa Krama... then I don't see how you can simply claim he didn't practice
Vinyasa.

While I respect the comparative study, most of these other points
amount to little more than guesswork in the absence of hard evidence, leaving us with nothing but subjective
approaches and interpretations.

For instance, I disagree with the notion that Patanjali’s method is the "hardest" and that Hatha
yoga is the "easier" route because it starts with the body. Whether a path is
easy or difficult depends entirely on a person's temperament. Some might prefer
to read thirty books or meditate for several hours, whereas when faced with
intense physical exertion—particularly something as raw as original
Hatha—they might buckle under the pressure. For the purely intellectual types,
approaching through the body would likely be much harder than approaching through the mental aspect.

It is for these exact reasons that the need for a physical Hatha
approach serves as a supplement to the Sutras; it simply makes yoga accessible to
people of various temperaments who find a purely psychological approach
unappealing.

And if we follow that logic, why wouldn't Ashtanga Vinyasa serve as a supplement too?
After all, it isn't just about movement, at least not at the beginner
levels. True Ashtanga Vinyasa is meditation in motion, requiring total
surrender to the sequence and focus on what you mentioned: the bandhas, ujjayi breathing, and the breath itself.
Admittedly, the complete quieting of the mind doesn't happen immediately during the asanas;
it happens once the other elements of the system are incorporated.
One begins with exhausting asana sequences that, while raising energy levels, simultaneously
clear the mind of distractions. This leads directly into pranayama,
which uses various breathing ratios to sharpen the focus of the cleared mind
onto a single point—in this case, the breath or its origin. Once you have achieved
a clear, focused mind, all the necessary prerequisites for
meditation (dhyana) are met, leading to the cessation of all movement, the calming
of the mental chatter, and—through intensive practice of the entire system—eventually reaching absolute
union with one's true self (samadhi).
By framing it the way you are, you're oversimplifying and stripping away the essence of
Ashtanga Vinyasa yoga, reducing it to mere asanas and bandhas, when those are
just fragments that only form a cohesive system when combined with the other components.

On a side note, regarding the mention of Swenson's friend,
you might be interested to know from reliable sources that late in '06
or early '07, Swenson is planning to visit the States to host
a full five-day seminar/teacher training. They are still finalizing
the details and potential changes, but the trip is confirmed. It'll be about time someone
finally made the trip out here. =)

Nice, that works for Swanson. But a five-day seminar is one thing... a five-day teacher training? You mean a training specifically just for instructors?

Regarding what you said about Ashtanga Vinyasa, I know the theory inside out from years of practice, but my actual experience tells a different story.

And earlier, those weren't speculations. You're speculating that an intellectual might find Patanjali’s approach easier... but try actually living by Patanjali’s instructions. First off, you wouldn't even manage 5% of Yama and Niyama because daily life constantly pulls you away. Yogis figured out long ago that controlling the body is easy, but... the mind, the consciousness... doing that mentally is incredibly difficult. Not just conscious thought, but the subconscious. That's what Patanjali talks about. Real things come after. After the physical. It's the same in Taoism, or Buddha's teachings—he was familiar with Samkhya, and maybe parts of "Hatha" Yoga too.

The whole point of Hatha Yoga is that the body can be forgotten... transcended. If you spend your entire life doing Ashtanga Vinyasa asanas, will you ever truly transcend the body? No. Like Swanson, you might end up strong and healthy, but beyond that, reaching Patanjali’s dharana (concentration) will be a struggle. Those states only happen when everything stops. The external and internal noise. The muscle work, the senses, the consciousness...
That's why Ashtanga Vinyasa only references Patanjali in name; it isn't actually connected to him.

Then there are the traps in Ashtanga Vinyasa. Most Americans try to force things through sheer effort, mimicking what they see advanced teachers doing—if they're even watching Indians. But the approach is different over there. Being a long-term vegetarian and being mindful of diet plays a huge role. Your muscle tone relaxes, and you become more flexible. Meanwhile, Americans are just straining. Tense in their psyche and attitude, always waiting for the next external stimulus.
In Yoga, people force the lotus pose or headstands. You can't do a headstand without core strength and arm strength, otherwise, all that weight goes straight to your cervical spine, which is the most sensitive part. Most women starting Ashtanga don't have developed enough core or arm muscles. The consequences are obvious.
Ashtanga Vinyasa uses a lot of advanced asanas that get forced. The knees take a massive hit; they're already under pressure in standard asanas, but in Ashtanga, it's worse because there are no breaks between movements. You won't feel it immediately, but after a few years... Iyengar realized this and slowed the asanas down completely. I know plenty of Ashtanga teachers, both Indian and American, who approach these exercises in a totally unhealthy way. Just forcing it, regardless of skeletal structure. Most Ashtanga Vinyasa moves should only be attempted once they can be done effortlessly on their own. Students don't notice the injuries at first because they release so much energy. But... people just push too hard.
Personally, I prefer a middle ground between Iyengar and Vinyasa. To me, it's the healthiest way to approach this athletic version of Hatha Yoga.

----------------------
Nice, that works for Swanson. But while a five-day seminar sounds great, a five-day teacher's training? You mean a training specifically for instructors?
----------------------

I’m not entirely sure how the logistics will shake out yet, but from what I’ve gathered,
they’ll be hosting it in various locations, so it should be a mix of both formats. Essentially,
it will include everything you'd find in a standard seminar, plus practical drills where everyone works in pairs
with a partner. They'll either perform asanas together, or
one person will practice while the other assists with alignment and posture under Swanson's guidance, and
in that way, it functions as a teacher's training because you gain a much deeper
understanding of how to work with and lead another person.

-----------------------
You seem to be suggesting that it would be easier for some intellectual to follow Patanjali's approach... but just try living by Patanjali's instructions. First off, you wouldn't even manage 5% of Yama and Niyama, because the grind of daily life constantly pulls you away. Yogis figured out long ago that controlling the body is easy, but the mind—the consciousness, the mental state—is incredibly difficult. And I don't mean conscious thought, but the subconscious.
-----------------------

Well, you admitted yourself that daily life keeps pulling you away, and those yogis
you're talking about typically retreated to various monasteries and
sanctuaries for ten years or more, where they had zero contact
with the rest of society. For people in those positions, it was actually much easier to adhere to
Yama and Niyama and focus on the subconscious mental aspects rather than
just physical work.

Besides, this whole mind-body debate is pointless, as they really ought to be viewed as
a single entity rather than two separate things. Even the Buddhist and Taoist teachings you're referencing,
along with the entire Chinese belief system, suggest that if you begin with Yang
activities, such as asanas, you eventually need to move toward Yin activities
that aren't on a physical plane to achieve wholeness. Conversely, the same applies
to moving from Yin back toward Yang; one cannot be complete without the other.

Following that logic, I'll address your question regarding whether practicing
Ashtanga Vinyasa can allow one to transcend the body. If that is your goal—meaning
to achieve Kaivalya—then Ashtanga Vinyasa asanas can be an excellent stepping stone
toward those aforementioned Yin activities, meditation, and the psychological and mental
exploration required to reach the cessation of mental fluctuations (vrittis).
However, not everyone who practices yoga is aiming for Kaivalya, the end of the cycle of
rebirth (samsara), or the total stillness of the mind. Most people don't have
those kinds of ambitions; they are satisfied with improved concentration, sharpened senses,
and simply staying strong and healthy while continuing to live their lives within a world
that isn't isolated from others, engaging in social life,
rather than retreating into an introverted self-study completely detached from
the rest of the world. Iyengar calls this "choosing the life of a householder."
He also mentioned being offered the chance to become a Sanyasin—isolated
from society and devoted solely to his own spiritual and mental pursuits—but he
declined, precisely because he wanted to bring yoga closer to regular people and live among
them, dealing with all their problems and pleasures. It’s the same situation with
Swanson; you have to understand that for some, the goal isn't Kaivalya, but rather
living as closely to yogic principles as possible while simultaneously
maintaining that previously mentioned householder's life. Iyengar makes another
interesting point: he says that even now, at 88 years old, when he practices yoga
during his three-hour sessions, every single asana has become a deeply
meditative experience. Does that mean the body can be transcended
even while it is still being utilized? Ask Iyengar. =)

I agree with your last point about how, unlike practitioners in India,
Westerners generally force themselves into poses while ignoring factors like
diet, which plays a vital role. But with the massive surge in the "new age" trend
and an increased awareness of oneself and what we consume...
It affects the body, and those changes start to manifest if they haven't already.
More or less, any serious athlete who actually cares about their physical condition—not just the casual yogis—
is hyper-focused on nutrition these days, choosing specific foods to ensure they get the best possible
results for their training, whether that means going vegetarian or
just maintaining a strictly balanced diet.

But don't go thinking it’s just Westerners pushing themselves too hard; sometimes
the Eastern teachers are the ones forcing the Americans into positions. =) There's an interesting story about when
David Williams was studying Ashtanga sequences under Jois. They were working
on Kurmasana (the tortoise pose), and Jois actually sat on Williams' back, forcing him
deep into the pose and holding him there for about half an hour. By the time
Williams finally tried to stand up, he had essentially lost all the
cushioning in his lower lumbar discs. It took him several
months just to be able to stand upright and walk normally again.
And don't even get me started on how brutal Krishnamacharya’s teaching style was;
it’s well known that he would strike students with a cane or withhold
food and water until they mastered a certain posture. Some of those
ruthless methods were passed down to Iyengar too; from what I’ve seen on his seminar DVDs,
he’s notorious for hitting his students
and frequently losing his temper with them. When I first watched those, I thought,
what kind of bullshit is this? Is this a military bootcamp or a yoga
class? That’s a massive strike against him as a teacher. So, you see,
it isn't all the fault of the Americans.

Injuries happen, and they always will. You make a good point about the knees;
you have to be careful. That’s why I occasionally focus on asanas specifically designed
for knee strengthening and stability—better to prevent an injury than try to fix one later.
As for my routine, I personally practice intense Ashtanga Vinyasa, but I also make sure to get
at least an hour of Yin yoga in every day. That’s the "cold" yoga where you
hold poses for four or five minutes at a time. The goal isn't muscle stretching,
but rather targeting the connective tissues—specifically the ligaments. If they are
too tight, the practice brings them back to an optimal level; if they aren't, they are stretched
so the body can reset them to their ideal state, making them more elastic in the process.
I truly feel like these two styles
complement each other perfectly. Whenever I hit a temporary plateau
in my Ashtanga practice, Yin yoga provides exactly what I need to push through it
and open myself up to further progress in Ashtanga.

Heh... Iyengar isn't actually losing his cool with his students. It’s more for their own benefit. 😁 I haven't sat through all his videos, but I highly doubt he's actually hitting anyone. It's just that specific way of showing attention in Indian culture, where even a touch carries a completely different weight.
It’s not that aggressive, Western style of losing it—the kind of thing that looks shocking when viewed through a different cultural lens. I was once out in Rishikesh with Rudra (one of Iyengar's top senior instructors), and even he gets loud sometimes. "Watch your leg! Watch your leg! You're gonna fall! Why are you doing this!?" Honestly, Josh and I are always cracking up at his accent... but to an outsider, it might look like some drill sergeant barking orders. In reality, it's just funny. If you know the teacher, you can tell it's a totally different relationship... just different vibes.

Look, there’s no such thing as Yin or Yang yoga. The word Yoga itself implies unification... bringing things together. Hatha Yoga, as a system, is basically just a practical way to merge Prana—the solar energy—with your mental energy, the lunar side. It’s about joining active energy with mental strength. Like Buddha’s Middle Way. If you lean too far into Yin or too far into Yang, you aren't practicing union anymore. You're just picking a side.

That's why Ashtanga Vinyasa isn't really "Yoga" either. It just borrows methods from Hatha to achieve something else entirely, rather than seeking true unification. It's way too "Yang." It leans heavily on Prana Shakti and Pingala, while pretty much ignoring Chitta Shakti or Ida.

So, I was thinking about something. If Bush had actually studied the Hatha Yoga Pradipika, he might have noticed how much the text emphasizes that true knowledge is passed directly from a Guru to a student. To Americans, that sounds pretty abstract. We don't really have a Gurukul system here. It feels especially out of touch to people with a critical, rational mindset.
There’s really only one way to understand it—by trying to find out for yourself.

Basically, what the Hatha Yoga Pradipika—and all those other books born from the Gurukul tradition—is saying is that genuine insight comes through a Guru.

Then there’s this concept called Guru Tattwa. It’s not about the person or their ego; it’s more like a fundamental element of being a Guru. Patabi Jois doesn't seem to have that. Instead of the Guru element, he’s got the money element. Sure, he can teach you the physical exercises, but he can't pass on that "true knowledge," whatever that may be, because he lacks that core component. :|
Maybe he had it once, maybe he still does... we could speculate if he picked it up from Krishnamacharya or not. But the reality is, he isn't passing it on. He built a massive corporation and counts his cash in an office. He lives this comfortable, luxury lifestyle, going on safaris in Africa. Look, that's fine—he's a teacher in the classic, Western sense. But he still insists on being called "Guruji"...
And that's how a thread with a stupid title can actually turn into something a bit deeper..😁

shadowgardener12 said:Hehe... no, Iyengar isn't actually berating his students; it’s for their own good. 😁 I haven't sat through all his videos, but I doubt he's truly hitting anyone. It feels more like that specific style of attention you see in certain Eastern cultures, where physical touch carries a completely different weight.
And it isn't that aggressive, Western-style shouting that can seem so jarring to an outsider. I once visited Rudra in Rishikesh—he's one of Iyengar's top senior teachers—and even he'll bark at you: "Watch your leg! Watch your leg! You're gonna fall! Why are you doing this?!" Josh always cracks me up with his accent, but to a stranger, it might look like some drill sergeant routine. In reality, it’s pretty funny, and if you have any connection to the teacher, you can just feel that the vibe is entirely different.

Haha, "watch your leg, you're gonna fall." =) And those guys from India have such a distinct way of speaking English.
It's not uncommon for them to invent new English terms that even native speakers
have never heard before. =) As for the whole Iyengar thing, man, you really have to see it to believe it.
The whole situation doesn't exactly scream "healthy" if you ask me. For instance, watching a seminar recording,
you'll see him hovering over his senior teachers while they instruct
their own classes surrounding them. Before a female teacher can even get three or four
seconds into her instruction, he’ll jump in without a hint of tact,
interrupting her to tell her she’s doing it wrong, and then
launch into these theories that basically just restate
what she was already saying herself. =) Watching it, you get the impression he's constantly undermining
all of his own teachers. Then there's the part where he calls everyone closer
so they can get a better look at the teachers working. Once people are watching, he tells them to
get back to their spots so the teaching can resume, and then Iyengar starts snapping at
them like, "Why are you wasting my time?!?? If you don't want to learn
from me, go away, I don't need you!" He gets all worked up and starts yelling,
with eyes full of pure impatience. Heh. Then later, there's a moment where a female teacher
is told by the instructor to do a headstand and is given a blanket to put on the floor
to work on. She takes the blanket but places it vertically instead of parallel to the floor.
He approaches her and actually strikes her on the back, commenting, "Now when
I hit her, next time she will remember the right way to put a blanket on
the floor." 🤣 I nearly lost it. Even Iyengar admits himself that his students
complain he's a "hitter." But knowing he comes from an era when yoga was practiced
out in public squares where crowds gathered, and some guy would walk through
the middle hitting people with a stick to correct their posture—moving from sticks to hands
is arguably progress. =) Still, that's a major flaw for Iyengar as a teacher;
impatience is a bad trait, especially for someone claiming to be a yogi.

shadowgardener12 said:By the way, there is no such thing as "Yin" or "Yang" yoga. The word Yoga itself implies unification, the act of bringing things together. As a system, Hatha Yoga is essentially a practical method for merging Prana (the sun) with mental energy (the moon). Yoga is the union of active energy—Prana—and mental strength. It’s the Buddha’s middle path. Once you lean too far toward either Yin or Yang, you aren't practicing unification anymore; you're just drifting away from the balance of those opposing forces.

That’s why Ashtanga Vinyasa isn't strictly "Yoga"; it simply borrows methods from Hatha Yoga to achieve a different end rather than true unification. It’s far too "Yang." It leans heavily into Prana Shakti and Pingala while almost entirely ignoring Chitta Shakti or Ida.

The whole concept of Yin and Yang yoga doesn't actually belong to Hatha, but rather to Taoist traditions. In that context,
it consists of static Yin postures paired with active Yang sequences, much like how
Ashtanga Vinyasa functions, just with slightly different forms. Besides, two
things don't need to happen at the exact same moment to create a whole. For instance, an exhale is Yin and an inhale
is Yang; they don't occur simultaneously, yet they constitute a Yin-Yang whole.
In the same vein, a physical Ashtanga Vinyasa session might be perfect for addressing a
Yang predisposition, and if you pair it with meditation or some other form of Yin activity,
you can create a complete Yin-Yang balance—a true unification of those two opposing forces.

Furthermore, Hatha itself carries more meanings and interpretations than just this specific
unification of solar and lunar energies. In many places, and quite frequently,
you'll find the explanation that Hatha in Sanskrit translates to force, sometimes even
implying violence, which is meant to express the sheer intensity of the physical
practice itself. To properly execute advanced levels of asanas, one needs to develop
significant physical strength and power.

I haven't come across any serious yoga school or tradition that interprets the word HaTha as "force."
The consensus is usually about the sun and the moon—Pingala and Ida.

In Yoga, there’s no force; there's just minimal effort. There's Ahimsa. Any kind of force just creates more turbulence in the mind. Yoga is about letting go, not straining. Sure, if you push through Asanas using brute strength, like in some Ashtanga Vinyasa flows, you'll get certain physical results... but you're going to miss the actual mental component.

shadowgardener12 said:I haven't heard of any legitimate Yoga school or tradition that actually interprets "HaTha" as literal physical force.
The standard consensus remains the balance of the sun and moon—Pingala and Ida.

In Yoga, there is no such thing as force; there is only minimal effort. There is Ahimsa. Any use of force just creates more turbulence in the mind. Yoga is about letting go, not straining. Sure, if you push through Asanas using brute strength—like in some intense Ashtanga Vinyasa flows—you'll get certain physical results, but you're going to miss the most important mental component entirely.

Here is what I was getting at regarding the original Sanskrit meaning:

http://www.answers.com/topic/hatha-yoga

[Sanskrit haṭhayogaḥ : haṭhaḥ, violence, force (from forcing the mind to withdraw from the outside world by the use of difficult postures) + yogaḥ, union, yoga; see yoga.]

Hmm... www.answers.comI'm never talking about the internet...
There’s plenty of that out there... just hearsay and rumors... and usually, the context is something else entirely...

The Hatha Yoga Pradipika doesn't mention force once... but it’s obsessed with Ida and Pingala. And that’s all metaphorical anyway. Every yoga or tantra text works like that. It's symbolic for us, sure, but for the people actually living through it back then? They had direct experience. It wasn't just a metaphor to them...

I’ll probably end up citing Mircea Eliade. He spent eight years studying Sanskrit and ancient yogic texts under Professor Dasgupta in Calcutta before writing his definitive work on Yoga—a book that's still the gold standard for yogic and tantric studies today. Back in the 1930s, when India was much more rugged, he actually lived the life of a wandering ascetic, spending six months at Swami Sivananda's ashram...

The Yoga and Tantra chapter. Specifically that 1959 German edition... back when Eliade was teaching religious history over at the University of Chicago.

citat:

Goraknath claims he’s the author of some lost debate titled... Hatha yoga... Just one preserved text, so to speak... Goraksa-Sataka...Regarding that last bit about the so-called Goraks-Method... it basically breaks down the word... hatha(literally "violence, violent effort") s lol Sun, and... tha The Moon. When the Sun and Moon finally align... that’s Yoga. Or so some texts say... ha-thau = surya-candrau I can't quite make sense of that... sounds like a typo.
Just a side note: Surya refers to the morning sun—like saying "dawn" in English... while Candra is the moon.

Eliade goes on to say that the Hatha Yoga Pradipika pulls directly from the Goraksha-Swataki, since it incorporates verses and passages from that text. He also points out the Tantric influence—which makes sense, given Gorakshanath was a Tantric practitioner—and mentions two other key Hatha Yoga texts, the Gheranda Samhita and the Shiva Samhita. There's clearly some Buddhist and Vedic influence baked in too, though I won't get into all those details here. If you're interested, just grab Eliade's book...

If you want to actually get the meanings behind Hatha Yoga terms and asanas right, you can't just pick one book. You need to cross-reference all three preserved texts—the Pradipika and those two Samhita works. As for what "Hatha Yoga" actually means... that's already laid out in the Goraksha Paddhati.