|
daytripper23
?


Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 3,595
Loc:
|
Re: A Critique of Yoga Forms [Re: deCypher]
#12368077 - 04/10/10 03:29 PM (13 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I have described a pragmatic (that is what all the talk about praxis is about) philosophy of anti-realism, and attempted to distinguish it from irrationality or nihilism.
I don't know what you are describing. What do you mean "you believe contradictions?"
|
deCypher



Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
|
|
For instance:
I believe everything is One. I simultaneously believe that everything is separate.
Does this answer your question?
-------------------- We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
 
|
daytripper23
?


Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 3,595
Loc:
|
Re: A Critique of Yoga Forms [Re: deCypher] 1
#12368149 - 04/10/10 03:46 PM (13 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I will have to get back to you on that.
Good talking to you Mr Cypher, I have to write an essay now.
|
deCypher



Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
|
|
Likewise!
-------------------- We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
 
|
g00ru
lit pants tit licker



Registered: 08/09/07
Posts: 21,088
Loc: georgia, us
Last seen: 5 years, 1 month
|
Re: A Critique of Yoga Forms [Re: deCypher] 1
#12368214 - 04/10/10 04:04 PM (13 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr. Cypher said: I guess I still don't understand if this Pranic energy actually exists or if it's just a convenient visualization metaphor/tool used to produce certain effects on the mind/body.
What's the difference, really? You're directing thought energy to a part of the body and certain results follow. "energy" in my opinion is just a term that signifies any sort of capacity to alter or do work. In this way you can see a link between the kinetic and potential energy of physics and the thought energy of a focused mind. It may well be a metaphor, but a metaphor is still a thing.
-------------------- check out my music! drowse in prison and your waking will be but loss
|
deCypher



Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
|
Re: A Critique of Yoga Forms [Re: g00ru]
#12368244 - 04/10/10 04:14 PM (13 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
-------------------- We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
 
|
daytripper23
?


Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 3,595
Loc:
|
Re: A Critique of Yoga Forms [Re: deCypher]
#12372288 - 04/11/10 11:54 AM (13 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Kickle, I enjoyed your critique of the forms, and I think you raise a lot of interesting questions. This is what I like to think about, although personally, I don't see how anyone takes a static position towards form (either way). But digging your heels you create an interesting anchor point. I am only recently getting into yoga myself, and I can relate to an external conception of it.
Its interesting to me to observe how the mind resonates with practice. Just this last week, I've been checking out the local Iyengar classes, a kind of yoga where the forms are relatively static. That is, generally one holds poses more than flowing through them. So to me it can seem fitting to regard form in terms of a static point, but on what level? What I have found so far is that even though the forms can be more or less static, I haven't encountered any practice that a point of gravitation incurs upon me as absolute, as if somehow demanding conformity.
Note that my comparison is very general, in that the relatively static Iyengar yoga is in contrast to flowing Vinyasa. These broad examples serve as the contrast of a philosophy I am ultimately attempting to represent. My goal here is representative, while my particular understanding and experience of yoga is very humble, and anyone would probably be better asking someone like Yogabunny about any specifics.
Anyways, the point of my comparison is that a static conception of form, like a snapshot, is very limited to represent a flowing practice such as Vinyasa. A static conception of Iyengar on the other hand, might seem closer as representative in itself. But even Iyengar, if I may paraphrase what I heard today, "stretches to certain static poses, but it also stretches from." So they are both practical, and indeed, in both practices a person wants to intimately understand a center of gravity. That is a point of static conception in a certain sense. It is internally conceived, or found within praxis/practice.
I find that this "point", the "embodiment of gravity", or its conception as the "conforming pull" - is for the most part personal in the practice of yoga. It is your center of gravity, even though we are all pulled to the same earth. Or as any good teacher would say - listen to your body. I think that this personal intimation takes a clear precedence to the "doctrinal" forms that are passed down.
But I would further argue that even those forms are tailored to the uniquely "human" physique, which was not even a universal conception either. Rather, a "human" practice is conceived within the evolutionary spectrum. So the possibility of conformation is thanks to the individual situation we are in, of mind and body, and the similar situation we all find ourselves in as humans. That is where I imagine the real conformity occurs, and so in this regard, it is certainly within the realm of possibilities that it is your body and your mind that defines this engagement - at an individual level, or even a human level.
My point in that sense, is that there is not necessarily an appeal to universality in the conception of these forms.
Applying rhetoric that is strictly of psychological or philosophical (mind) nature will obviously be limited to a practice of concerned with mind and body. To me this study has actually revealed a great necessity to bring a perspective of dependent origination (such as mind/body) to the discursive forms of either philosophy or psychology, such as for example, what we are doing here. I would argue on a philosophical level, that one needs to acknowledge the metaphysical instantiation of logos, rationality, or any other system of the mind. Yoga could represent this by its practical focus on mind and body.
______________________________________________________________________ Here is an expanded take on Jung's little story that I've found so interesting. THis is sort of a work in progress. While the following is the continuation of the previous idea, if you are not a fan of abstruse metaphysics you might want to skip this portion of the post (only because I would like people to see the end) I will mark the end of this metaphysical portion with the same demarcation.
My precise disagreement with Jung is his imagination that the contextual declaration of "that's right" - a contextual remark that defines the symbol - could somehow precede that very symbol. He makes it seem like they are arising together, but this is tantamount to the fact the he is not acknowledging the instantiation of his metaphysics.
"That's right" would be properly conceived in two parts, in terms of the symbol, and in terms of the context of that symbol. That conception would be doctrinal, precisely as he describes it: "That's right" would derive its context from some previous form, if only the idea that "that's right" means something. But Doctrine could not arise out of itself, because there would be no higher appeal. Language or the symbol itself could not have possibly been conceived by reference, because reference did not yet exist. Jung merely describes the possibility of doctrinal reference, and since this is not possibly the case as an original conception, it is not necessarily the case from within convention either. Thus, his story should not be mistaken as the substantive intimation or genesis of the symbol. This is just an impossible scenario.
I believe in the possibility of generic emptiness of form. Generic form (that is a genitive, not Universal), that is conceived by the representation of genealogy, seems to point to a genesis. But this is merely how language subsequently works.
It seems to me, that in light of its use for deconstruction, genealogy does point to the emptiness of form, and that is why a path is conceivable through representation (as the praxis of language). This emptiness could not possibly speak though. If the story was meant to describe a generic emptiness that applies to all forms, the sage would not say "that's right". There would be no sentiment paired to the narrative disappointment of his substantive declaration. How could emptiness "speak"? I think it is only understood by circumspection. My goal here is to allow it to speak indirectly, through the praxis of representation, but not in nihilism of its own form. I am not sure that I have adequately represented the possibility of emptiness, but I believe I have at least deconstructed the alternatives of either substantive or nihilistic claims.
Following this digression, I will now return to this concept of practice/praxis ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It seems like people sometimes might hear a little too much about what goes on within the practice, from an outside perspective, and so it might seem "eccentric". (Like gravitation.) I mean some of the poses (forms) are clearly eccentric, but what any and every single one of them basically comes down to the practice. I would say that this apparent eccentricity is a process, by which the point of gravity is (like emptiness) understood by circumspection. People talk about the substantive point, or a body of gravitation as a practical reference, and they might refer to it as both a particular and universal body to describe the process more clearly (or as it seems, at all).
My experience yoga is a practice that works with eccentricity. The word I would use to describe this, is accommodating. Perhaps that is commodifying myself into a certain praxis, or within a certain "orbit". But the thing is, I don't believe there is any alternative to this. I am much more skeptical of the supposed unitary conception of nature.
An Eccentric Orbit:


Kickle, you should check out this film. I would describe it as a meeting of intrinsic and extrinsic perspectives of yoga. I don't think it really represents the practice of yoga in an incredible depth, but maybe its a point of discursive interest. Anyways, what you have spoken of has reminded me very much of it: "A skeptic's journey into the world of yoga".
http://enlightenupthefilm.com/
Its on netflix - watch instantly. You could probably find a torrent too.
Edited by daytripper23 (04/11/10 10:03 PM)
|
daytripper23
?


Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 3,595
Loc:
|
|
And btw, I would be happy to clarify and work with my own eccentric use of language, so feel free to point something out if it doesn't make sense.
|
p4kSouL
Animals Are Cool

Registered: 01/13/05
Posts: 3,666
|
|
Cool! Can you explain the "Eccentric Orbit", I dont really understand it?? Thanks man!
|
daytripper23
?


Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 3,595
Loc:
|
Re: A Critique of Yoga Forms [Re: p4kSouL]
#12373574 - 04/11/10 03:52 PM (13 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Well first off, I thought this metaphor of an "orbit" was an original concept, but now I can see that you referred to orbit when you were talking about prāna.
Is this a particular terminology of yoga that you are aware of? Could you elaborate?
|
p4kSouL
Animals Are Cool

Registered: 01/13/05
Posts: 3,666
|
|
The Macrocomsic orbit & Microcosmic Orbit is a Taoist Technology for mediation practice.
In involves connecting meridian channels up the back of the body and down the front of the body. (They can reverse two up the front down the back it does not really mater)

The chakras correlate to the existence to this orbit, in the sense that the Front peddles of Sushumna are associated to the functional channel, as the back peddles of Sushumna associate with governing channel.
This is why I personally like to visualize the peddles of the chakras, better then visualizing "energy moving along channels". Its like learning how to breath through the whole body.
Ive been taught, the best way to do yoga is hold a pose, keep the tongue touching the roof of the mouth above the front teeth (automatically connects front and back channels of the microcosmic orbit), and breath deep even breaths. Holding Asana for each chakra (And internalise emotional attitude of each chakra) 5 to 10 minutes locks & cleans out energy in the human energy structure. Every asana has a chakra focus. Also some asanas activate all chakras and acupuncture points. But I am no master so dont take my advice 100 percent please.
This yogi explains Microsomci orbit pretty well:
To learn Chakra awakening I personally recommend, www.umaatantra.com Its probably the best distance learning yoga source around. They also have free videos on this too. And to understand the subtle stuff that is not usually taught in yoga class.
Edited by p4kSouL (04/11/10 10:26 PM)
|
daytripper23
?


Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 3,595
Loc:
|
Re: A Critique of Yoga Forms [Re: p4kSouL]
#12374337 - 04/11/10 08:01 PM (13 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Made a bit of an expansion on Jung's critique of the forms, as part of the last post.
Thanks for the info P4K, I will have to take a much closer look at this idea. Can't wait, but I have schoolwork to do.
|
p4kSouL
Animals Are Cool

Registered: 01/13/05
Posts: 3,666
|
|
No problem and thank you for sharing your information daytripper23
|
deCypher



Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
|
|
Quote:
daytripper23 said: I will have to get back to you on that.
-------------------- We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
 
|
Kickle
Wanderer



Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 17,851
Last seen: 1 hour, 55 minutes
|
|
My point is, there is not necessarily an appeal to universality in the conception of these forms
Absolutely not, I think we strongly agree on this point. Like magnets drawn to the same piece of metal. There is no attempt to lay down a static nature to this critique -- its interpretation is fluid, just as yoga's is.
This post, for me, was about not trying to tie down what underlies yoga. For it did not arise out of something that can be tied down. That to pursue it through yoga, is to chase ghosts. Yoga forms are useful in the utmost. But to me they do not transcend what they are. Just as the body does not transcend itself. What fills them may potentially be transcendental, but the form itself is empty.
I am drifting here somewhat from what you wrote, and I'm not so sure that we disagree on any of this. Rather, I am rewording it into a lingo that I comprehend with a more Buddhist/Jungian background. This of course points out that both you and I, when discussing such a topic, are inherently limited by language. For language, as you described, stems from a rhetoric of some sort. I'm unsure if you have followed any of the neuropsychology, but it gives a solid basis for why language cannot transcend brain function. To describe anything that transcends the brain (aka the body) is to try and transcend language. It is an impossible task, yet one that I find very fun to play with.
=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^= ^_^
As for your mid section, I do have some things relating more directly to your writings. "Thus, his story should not be mistaken as the substantive intimation or genesis of the symbol. This is just an impossible scenario."
I don't think Jung would have had anyone interpret it any other way. He loved Plato for his contributions in this regard. The man who writes on the wall is not creating anything. He is manifesting what already is, into form. The problem lies in the fact that people believe that something powerful was created. Something substantial -- something to be mirrored and mimicked. But it was not created. It is just a form, one of many. One that was personal for the individual manifesting it.
What I take from this, is that Jung believed that the process of manifesting what is, is a deeply personal endeavor. One that is richly rewarding and extremely powerful. And that this process is slowed when an individual tries to say any one form is the manifestation of what is. To write it down and create a doctrine out of it, to say THIS form, yes, this one is the way.
Sure, it may be the way... for some. And for a lot of others, it probably isn't. It encourages people to seek their own answers. To not buy into doctrine, especially if it doesn't fit. When I look at the influx of Eastern ideas into Western culture, I see a lot of people thinking "Yes, this time I've got the answer!" But are they really looking for an answer, or just another form to stuff their ego into for a while?
Jung said that those who do not understand religion will be the ones most comfortable sticking within doctrine. For those who do understand religion, such a stay will chafe. They will not feel a stranger to any religion, merely they will not be content in its doctrine.
That pretty much sums up my feelings about it as well
-------------------- Why shouldn't the truth be stranger than fiction? Fiction, after all, has to make sense. -- Mark Twain
Edited by Kickle (04/11/10 11:01 PM)
|
Kickle
Wanderer



Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 17,851
Last seen: 1 hour, 55 minutes
|
Re: A Critique of Yoga Forms [Re: Kickle]
#12375241 - 04/11/10 11:05 PM (13 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
p.s. makes me wish Icelander would read long posts
-------------------- Why shouldn't the truth be stranger than fiction? Fiction, after all, has to make sense. -- Mark Twain
|
deCypher



Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
|
Re: A Critique of Yoga Forms [Re: Kickle]
#12375292 - 04/11/10 11:13 PM (13 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Word. He's still ignoring me.
-------------------- We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
 
|
Kickle
Wanderer



Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 17,851
Last seen: 1 hour, 55 minutes
|
Re: A Critique of Yoga Forms [Re: deCypher]
#12375308 - 04/11/10 11:14 PM (13 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
To be fair, for a while there you were ignore worthy. I think you've come into a nice balance though
-------------------- Why shouldn't the truth be stranger than fiction? Fiction, after all, has to make sense. -- Mark Twain
|
deCypher



Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
|
Re: A Critique of Yoga Forms [Re: Kickle] 1
#12375323 - 04/11/10 11:16 PM (13 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I try. 
power corrupts
-------------------- We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
 
|
Kickle
Wanderer



Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 17,851
Last seen: 1 hour, 55 minutes
|
Re: A Critique of Yoga Forms [Re: deCypher] 1
#12375381 - 04/11/10 11:26 PM (13 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
absolutely
-------------------- Why shouldn't the truth be stranger than fiction? Fiction, after all, has to make sense. -- Mark Twain
|
|