Saturday, December 18, 2010

Yoga as Postmodern Shamanism: Reading Yoga 2.0

Thanks to Jay Winston over at Yoga for Cynics for posting his initial reflections on Matthew Remski and Scott Petrie's Yoga 2.0 (as well as the new movie, Black Swan, which I haven't yet seen), and for linking back to my October 2010 review of the book over at Elephant Journal. Normally I am very averse to going back and reading my past writing, but Jay's post piqued my curiosity (what did I say back then??), causing me to get past that resistance and re-read anyway. Happily, I found that I still like it - so I decided to repost it here, for anyone who may be interested but missed it over at EJ - and also to re-publicize Yoga 2.0, which is a little creative gem of a book that deserves to be read, engaged with, and built on. So without further ado (enough already!) here's the original post from Elephant.

 

When I first stumbled on Yoga 2.0, I glanced at it briefly and dismissed it as wacko.

But when I detached from my everyday busy-ness enough to really read it, I quickly started to believe it was brilliant.

Moving onward, I got annoyed, and once again dismissed it, this time as overly romantic. But then I re-engaged, and found it to be meaty.

Now that I’ve read the whole book and had time to digest it, I find it nourishing. So, I’m hoping that other serious yoga practitioners will muster the time and energy to bite into this quirkily unique enigma of a book.

Be forewarned, it’s not an easy read. Authors Matthew Remski and Scott Petrie state up front that Yoga 2.0 “is not an introductory text.” And truly, those who don’t have a feel for yoga in their bones, as well as some “familiarity with the basic structure of yogic thought and history,” may be utterly confounded by it.

But practitioners seeking to broaden and deepen their practice should check it out. Because the book itself works as sort of a crazy wisdom practice; a melding of evolutionary theory, postmodern irony, and heart-centered sincerity seeking to connect us to our life source by tapping into yoga’s shamanic roots.

Fail. Fail. Fail. REBOOT

Yoga 2.0 insists that it’s long past time to break out of ossified conceptions of “yoga”; whether they are remote and exotic (e.g., artificially canonized “sacred texts”) or popular and taken-for-granted (e.g., glitzy yoga videos).

“2.0” invokes the rapid evolution of cyberspace. Just as the “read-only internet pages of ten years ago (‘Internet 1.0’)” morphed into the interactive web of today, our relationship to yoga needs to shift (and quickly, as the world is in crisis) from one of external authority to internal dynamism:
Yoga 1.0 is history. It is a book on the shelf, and perhaps a lecture talking about the book. Yoga 2.0 is a conversation. 2.0 invokes a move toward empowerment, interactivity, and relationship in its transmission.


Searching for authenticity outside ourselves, we turn yogic texts into false idols that we pretend to venerate, but don’t truly derive any juice from:
Yoga Sutras, Hatha Yoga Pradapika, Yoga Vashistha, Gheranda Samihita: all are extractions from dusty libraries that have gained value more through academic than practical attention. Going back another layer, the pages from which the mostly German professors translated were themselves extracted from the oral tradition. So any current book on yoga is probably a 10th generation extraction, with prana draining away with each printing and recension.
Habituated to hollow representations, we continue to create more and more of them in the name of spreading the supposed “Truth” of “Yoga.” This sets up “a smoke screen behind which all sort of mediocrities and outrages can safely hide”: Yoga magazines pretending to be “more than glorified IKEA catalogs,” self-promoting hucksters pretending to be traditional Indian gurus, privileged Americans pretending to be buying a bit of enlightenment by New Age-y consumption.

“’Yoga,’” accuse Remski and Petrie, “makes culturally adrift denizens of postmodernity fawn over just about anyone in a dhoti and sandals.”

As humorous, pathetic, or simply lost as we may be, however, that’s far from the end of the story. Because despite such denunciations, Yoga 2.0 is at heart a deeply hopeful work. It recognizes our post-modern predicament: awash in the confusing complexity of the modern world, adrift without our old faith in the power of Enlightenment rationality and science to propel us into a better future. But it embodies a hope that other, more creative and mysterious powers are available for us to work with if we only tap them.

And yoga – worked skillfully – is a tool for tapping these powers, “a Swiss army knife of the bodymind.” Practiced at the cutting edge, yoga enables us to slice through the layers of social conditioning that disconnect us from our life source.

Evolution and Integration

Worked this way, yoga reconnects us to the shamanic energies that originally fueled its creation.

To heal our selves and our world, however, this reconnection must also be an integration. Remski and Petrie are not traditionalists, urging us to abandon the present for some supposedly unchanging ideal. Instead, they are evolutionists, calling us to embrace everything from the ancient to the postmodern in the ever-changing immediacy of life.


Yoga 2.0 situates this vision of yoga as evolution in a short but sweeping story that takes us from the primordial to the present. Presented as allegory rather than analysis, it resists simple summation. Nonetheless, I’ll present a bit to provide some sense of the rich set of ideas at play.

The story starts back in hunter-gatherer era, the time of the “bicameral mind.” Human beings are so completely connected to nature that “it’s impossible to tell where the world ends and where you begin.” Meditation begins as a tool of the hunter, a necessity of life integrated with killing and death.

(Interestingly, ahimsa (the yogic principle of non-violence) comes later, with the development of agricultural society. The primordial roots of yoga, however, remain connected to the energies of the hunter – like us, it keeps its fang-teeth as civilization progresses.)

As human society becomes more complex, the unitary consciousness of the bicameral mind necessarily fragments. Different tribes develop, encounter each another, and discover the fact of cultural difference: “their” ways are not “ours.”

While our first instinct is to destroy “the other” for the audacity of being different (a reaction that’s still, of course, all-too-present), over time we generally learn acceptance. Dealing with difference, however, requires recognizing the particularity of our own culture. Consequently, the human mind develops the capacity for “holding and considering different and even opposing points of view” simultaneously.

While this is a good thing, it necessarily cuts our collective connection to nature. The days of simply living according to instinct are over.

Consequently, shamans emerge as specialists of “prayer and magic” – holy men and women capable of reconnecting the tribe back to the primordial source.


Time goes on; even more complex societies develop. Spirituality becomes codified as religion. Priests and Brahmins emerge as religious specialists, dedicated to maintaining their buildings, personnel, dogmas and rituals.

If the yoga of the shaman is wild and primordial, the yoga of the priesthood is civilized and polite. It supports the social order and helps people cope with it. As such, it’s useful but not transformative. While quite appealing to most people, resisters and shamans want more:
Spirituality and bureaucracy begin to mirror each other, while the old yogi watches calmly from his outcaste hut, a machete in his hand.
The story continues on through the birth of Buddhism and the emergence of the Bhagavad-Gita. Each represents a particular paradigm of consciousness, and, consequently, a distinct way of practicing yoga. Fundamentally, however, the narrative continues to elaborate the claim that while consciousness necessarily becomes more complex in concert with society, yoga offers a means of integrating these accreting layers of consciousness with the primordial force of life.

Confronting Postmodern Crisis

Our contemporary situation is symbolized by the BP oil spill:
When we look at the pelican coated with crude oil, blinking its bloodshot eyes through a black slick, its feet glued to the plywood of its improvised cage, we receive a subconscious image of our own bodies, so slathered with self-consciousness and so abused by our extractive manias that we cannot breathe, let alone fly.

All of the externally imposed imagery that we internalize every day keeps us – like the bird – unable to experience our own nature.
How do we, right now, break into the contemporary body – so hard to see beneath the mirrors, cosmetics, images, self-images, magazines, and flatscreens – to fully experience and describe this body, this life?
By connecting us to our own bodies, yoga cuts through the layers of social conditioning and self-consciousness that keep us trapped in a truncated experience of life. And today, as all of nature is in crisis, direct connection with life is critically important – without it, we won’t even grasp what we’re losing until it’s gone.

Practiced as postmodern shamanism, yoga is a weapon for fighting this destruction, a means of pumping prana back into our selves and our world.
The supple cacophony of jungle, forest, and ocean has been overwhelmed by screaming jets, HVAC fans, jackhammers, 2-stoke engines, and white computer noise. The yogi’s typical response to modern racket is to seek silence. But the animals with whom she shares her shamanic heart have always struck their poses with cries of danger, self-assertion, or savage love. Let us then reawaken our asanas – and ancient selves – with calls and caws, hoots and howls.
While I did have some quibbles with the book – some of it seemed overly romanticized, unnecessarily dense, or excessively self-conscious – ultimately I was charmed by this vision and this call.

Because really, what else is to be done? Whether yoga (or anything else) can stop environmental devastation, I don’t know. But I share the belief that it’s a tool that can connect us to the creative energies of life, and that we need this connection to have hope of healing ourselves and our world.

"We Prefer Life": Paris, 1968




Yoga 2.0 is available for purchase through the book website, which you can access by clicking here.

Thursday, December 2, 2010

Yoga, Hinduism, and Contemporary American Culture

I’ve been ruminating on the Hindu American Foundation’s (HAF) “Take Back Yoga” campaign ever since the New York Times shot it to media stardom last weekend. Given my rather weird background as a political-science-professor-turned-yoga-teacher, this story’s combination of yoga and identity politics (the HAF being a self-proclaimed Hindu-American advocacy group) really got me going.

The question at stake is whether the American yoga community is (in the words of the HAF) “disassociating Yoga from its Hindu roots” – and, if so, whether this is problematic.

While I suspect that it runs counter to the views of many if not most of my fellow practitioners, after much reflection my conclusion is that:
  1. It’s quite true that there’s an odd silence surrounding Hinduism in the American yoga community. In 15 years of involvement, I’ve heard a lot about Tantra (not to get that started again!), as well as much less well-known (in the U.S. context) traditions such as Advaita Vedanta and Kashmir Shavism. Yet, what’s by far the most familiar term to most Americans – “Hinduism” – is rarely uttered, either in print or conversation.
  2.  And yes, I do think that this is problematic. In fact, the more I reflect on it, the more I find that I feel this way.
The reason that I think this, however, is not because I believe that “yoga” sprang directly from some mythical set of ancient “Hindu roots.” Both conceptually and historically, this seems hugely over-simplistic to me. Both “yoga” and “Hinduism” are words that refer to vast, diverse, and complex traditions. And as such, the reality is that both have always been understood and practiced in a huge variety of ways.

To make much sense of the “yoga and Hinduism” debate, I think, it’s crucial to define your terms. What type of yoga are you talking about? When and where? As practiced by whom? And precisely what do you mean by “Hinduism”? This is such vast terrain that it’s impossible to navigate it in non-specific terms for very long without getting hopelessly confused and lost.


The Cosmic Ocean Reveals Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva, 1835


Talking ‘Bout America, Yo

So let me be clear: What I’m thinking about in terms of this debate is the state of contemporary American culture.

I’m thinking about the 15 million or so mostly white Americans who go to (or teach) yoga classes at gyms or studios, who read (or reject) Yoga Journal (but in any case are familiar with it), who buy yoga books and DVDs, and who perhaps shell out for trainings and conferences when inspired (and solvent).

I’m also thinking about the 2.29 million Hindus of Indian origin living in the U.S. today, and the larger Hindu diaspora they’re a part of.

Just to be clear, I myself have no personal ties to either India or Hinduism. No, I’m pretty much your run-of-the-mill left-liberal WASP (although I did have one Grandmother who was an observant Jew and one who was a devout Southern Baptist, which helps explain why I’m drawn to religious and spiritual syncretism). I’ve had a few close Hindu friends (interestingly including one Latina convert Hindu from Detroit), but our discussions of yoga and/or Hinduism have been cursory, if they occurred at all. We have a big Indian community here in Chicago, but when I go to Devon Avenue to shop or eat out, I’m really just a local tourist.

I do, however, have a professional background writing and teaching about racial and ethnic politics in the U.S. So for better or worse, that’s the lens through which I view this debate.

Many of my interested, involved, and knowledgeable practitioner friends, in contrast, enter into it thinking about ancient Indian history. Some have explained that yoga and Hinduism really have little to do with each other at all. And I’m very interested in . But I also think that it’s obvious that this issue is too big to be treated as a simple, open-and-shut case.

Meanwhile, however, I’m thinking about the Civil Rights and Black Power movements and how revolutionary it was for African American culture to get any respect in this country. I’m thinking about how certain Native American advocacy groups have protested against what they see as the exploitative appropriation of their sacred symbols and traditions, and how important it is to at least listen respectfully to their POV.

Mexico City Olympics, 1968: Black Power salute

When I read over the HAF website, I’m thinking about the NAACP and MALDEF. I know the history; I know how important racial/ethnic advocacy groups with some legal/political savvy have been in moving this country closer to ideals of civic equality and individual opportunity that I very much support.

Which is not to say that I think that we non-Hindu practitioners should scramble to follow some arbitrary “politically correct” line about yoga and Hinduism just because the HAF is promoting it. They are only one organization. And while they are apparently the first professionally run Hindu-American advocacy group, it’s always true that no single group ever speaks for all of its purported members.

And even if they did, it’s also true there are now millions of non-Hindu yoga practitioners who have their own experience of yoga and lots of interesting and worthwhile things to say about it. All voices are valuable. No one should be silenced.

What’s at Stake?

It’s important to remember no one is suggesting that you need to be Hindu to practice yoga. On the contrary, everyone agrees that Hindu gurus have been telling us Westerners that yoga is a universal practice since it was first taught to us by Swami Vivekanada back in the late 19th century.

Nor is the question at stake “who owns yoga.” Framed in these terms (as done by both the Times and Deepak Chopra), it’s far too easy to dismissively respond that no one “owns” yoga. Again, most Hindu yoga teachers have been telling us that for over a century now.

What’s at stake, I think, is whether it’s valuable to start a new conversation that acknowledges – and respects – the historical and contemporary connections between yoga and Hinduism.

Personally, I think this sounds wonderful. I know that I don’t have a good understanding of Hinduism, and that it’s a huge and complex subject. I also know that I love yoga and want to deepen my knowledge of it – which certainly includes its relationship with Hinduism! This all sounds completely fascinating and enriching to me . . .

So I’ve been surprised that there seems to be so much resistance to opening up this dialog among my compatriots in the yoga community. Most everyone seems to agree that Hinduism is generally neither acknowledged nor discussed in the mainstream American yoga scene. Yet the dominant response seems to be: Yes, and that’s entirely appropriate.

Why? Some of the responses include: Because no one “owns” yoga. (But again, that’s not the issue.) Or because yoga predates Hinduism. (Fine, but what about the next few thousand years?) Or because “Hinduism” is essentially a modern term pushed by colonial Britain. (True, but contemporary asana practice is modern too. Wouldn’t it be interesting to know more about how both developed in tandem?)

Now, I recognize that by naming their campaign “Take Back Yoga,” the HAF took an aggressive, proprietary tone that some may find off-putting, or even offensive. But let’s remember that they are an advocacy group – their job is to get attention for their cause.


Controversial bumper sticker slogans attract attention in ways that nuanced, considerate discussions do not. Such is the nature of cultural and identity politics, not to mention politics in general – that’s just the way that it goes.

But the slogan “Take Back Yoga” accomplished its essential purpose: that is, calling attention to the almost eerie silence surrounding the subject of Hinduism in the American yoga community. Now that this is on the table, I think that it’s up to others interested in seeing a new discussion develop to step up and get started.

I, for one, would love to see it happen. Anyone else out there willing to join me?

Note: "Cosmic Ocean" image from http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00routesdata/1800_1899/hinduism/greatgods./greatgods.html
Newer Posts Older Posts Home