I've had a post floating around in my head for the last few weeks (years probably), the last week has brought it back to mind.
or seemingly much use for.
or perhaps....
The list seems to get longer every time I sit down to write it but high on the list are...
With the terminology above I'd probably throw in...
I 'm quiet happy with good old fashioned, bread and butter terminology like
but mostly I prefer to employ....
just practice, my practice, which really has nothing whatsoever to do with yours, or yours with mine for that matter.
I love that you have a practice too but don't think for one moment that mine should reflect yours or how you happen to conceive it or yours reflect mine.
As it happens my practice outwardly resembles somewhat the Ashtanga vinyasa taught by Pattabhi Jois and his family ,which isn't surprising as I originally developed my practice through the books and videos/dvds etc. of the early students of Pattabhi Jois. It's convenient to employ that term, Ashtanga, as well as occasionally Ashtangi but to be perfectly honest I seem to have less and less use for those terms too so lets put those on the list....
It doesn't interest me whether you are or aren't, whether on this list or that, who you've studied with or for how long, if drawn to you, lists don't come into it....
And why not lets chuck Yoga and Yogi on the list also,
More tired terminology that is perhaps past its sell by date, more a hindrance than a help.
Tear off the title page of your Patanjali and just write practice sutras instead, and for god sake throw out the commentary.... just practice and worry about making sense of it as you go along....
just as Vyasa did.
After learning that approach to practice generally referred to as Ashtanga, I turned to Pattabhi Jois' own teacher T. Krishnamacharya. It's the study and practice of Krishnamachaya's early work (consistent with his later) that currently most informs my own practice although I tend to pretty much keep the 'Ashtanga vinyasa' form of the practice that I began with and am most familiar and comfortable with. But I certainly don't consider Krishnamacharya sacrosanct, I don't consider him my guru, how could I, Guru is on my list of Ashtanga terminology that I have no use for.
I tend to see Krishnamacharya as a teacher in the same way perhaps as I saw/see Heidegger as a teacher , the philosopher who most fascinated and intrigued me and whose approach to thought most inspired my own at Uni and after. I put 'thought' in italics because Heidegger questions what is thinking just as Krishnamacharya perhaps questions what is practice. Both are very much tied to their traditions and yet questioning, exploring the nature of that tradition, perhaps seeking to overcome it ( damn, I used tradition), to find elbow room within it certainly.
But of course I've had many teachers, many inspirations and influences on my thinking and I question them all just as I question Heidegger and Krishnamacharya however inspiring and influential I may currently find them.
So to recap
Ashtanga terminology that I have no interest in
or seemingly much use for.
or perhaps....
Ashtanga terminology that I could quite happily live/practice without
The list seems to get longer every time I sit down to write it but high on the list are...
Parampara
Isvara-pranidhana ( albeit fascinating)
Surrender
Lineage
Lineage holder
A clumsy expression at best
Lineage holder
A clumsy expression at best
tradition
should I go on.....
With the terminology above I'd probably throw in...
Tantra
If the yogi's managed without tantra for a thousand years or so (at least) then so, I suspect, can I (don't worry yogi makes it on the list later)
hathayogapradipka
hatha texts in general come to think of it
fascinating but can do without them
I 'm quiet happy with good old fashioned, bread and butter terminology like
teacher(s), yep more than one,
respect for teacher(s),
....enough to engage with and question anything/all they may teach but respectfully
philosophy
but mostly I prefer to employ....
practice,
I love that you have a practice too but don't think for one moment that mine should reflect yours or how you happen to conceive it or yours reflect mine.
As it happens my practice outwardly resembles somewhat the Ashtanga vinyasa taught by Pattabhi Jois and his family ,which isn't surprising as I originally developed my practice through the books and videos/dvds etc. of the early students of Pattabhi Jois. It's convenient to employ that term, Ashtanga, as well as occasionally Ashtangi but to be perfectly honest I seem to have less and less use for those terms too so lets put those on the list....
Ashtanga
Ashtangi
and also....
Authorised
Certified
It doesn't interest me whether you are or aren't, whether on this list or that, who you've studied with or for how long, if drawn to you, lists don't come into it....
And why not lets chuck Yoga and Yogi on the list also,
Yoga
Yogi
More tired terminology that is perhaps past its sell by date, more a hindrance than a help.
Tear off the title page of your Patanjali and just write practice sutras instead, and for god sake throw out the commentary.... just practice and worry about making sense of it as you go along....
just as Vyasa did.
We can quite happily get on with our practice day in day out and let it take care of itself, work itself out without straitjacketing it with such terminology.
Motto of the week
Keep out of the way of your practice
Bumper sticker
Keep out of the way of my practice
Damnit
let it take care of itself.
Terminology is mostly there for those who make a living out of using it, for us who practice I suspect it just gets in the way.
Nope.....
Do your practice and all is coming
is on the list as well, as is...
1%theory,
95% practice
oh and ....
Mysore
as a concept, as terminology rather than a place name.
and for heaven sake, put
Advanced
and
instagram
on the list as well
After learning that approach to practice generally referred to as Ashtanga, I turned to Pattabhi Jois' own teacher T. Krishnamacharya. It's the study and practice of Krishnamachaya's early work (consistent with his later) that currently most informs my own practice although I tend to pretty much keep the 'Ashtanga vinyasa' form of the practice that I began with and am most familiar and comfortable with. But I certainly don't consider Krishnamacharya sacrosanct, I don't consider him my guru, how could I, Guru is on my list of Ashtanga terminology that I have no use for.
Guru
I tend to see Krishnamacharya as a teacher in the same way perhaps as I saw/see Heidegger as a teacher , the philosopher who most fascinated and intrigued me and whose approach to thought most inspired my own at Uni and after. I put 'thought' in italics because Heidegger questions what is thinking just as Krishnamacharya perhaps questions what is practice. Both are very much tied to their traditions and yet questioning, exploring the nature of that tradition, perhaps seeking to overcome it ( damn, I used tradition), to find elbow room within it certainly.
But of course I've had many teachers, many inspirations and influences on my thinking and I question them all just as I question Heidegger and Krishnamacharya however inspiring and influential I may currently find them.
So to recap
