Showing posts with label Rabindranath Tagore. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rabindranath Tagore. Show all posts

Infants, knowledge, and why we may not know our yoga

Yesterday, in my theory of knowledge class, I had a discussion with my students about what knowledge really is (what else can you really talk about in a class like this, anyway?). One interesting question that came up was: Is it possible to have knowledge without having any concepts?

Right now, you may be wondering: What has any of this to do with yoga? Why are you writing about this on a yoga blog? But stay with me a little: I'll get to the yoga part in due course.

Here's an example that we thought about during our class discussion. Consider an infant who has yet to learn and speak any words. This infant is being breastfed by its mother. We can imagine that every time it is being lifted to its mother's breast to be breastfed, the infant will experience a certain series of sensations: a sensation of warmth and firmness as it touches its mother's body and starts suckling on its mother's breast, a sensation of warm liquidity as it feels the milk from the mother's breast flow into its mouth, a sensation of sweetness as it tastes the milk.

Here's the question: Does the infant know that it is obtaining nourishment through this process? The students and I had different answers to this question. My students believe that even though the infant does not have the words to describe its experience, it knows that it is obtaining nourishment: If the infant is being breastfed regularly, it will become intuitively aware that this is the process it goes through (or rather, this is the process its mother puts it through) when it is feeling hungry, and that the succession of sensations described above always results in the feeling of hunger going away, to be replaced by a feeling of being sated. Thus, the infant knows that it is obtaining nourishment, even if it does not have the words and concepts to describe and label this experience.  

I understand where the students are coming from, and am actually sympathetic to their view, on some level. But on another level, the stuffy analytic philosopher in me refuses to accept that the infant knows anything in any meaningful sense. Here's why: If one is to be able to say that one knows something, one must be able to explain or give an account of what it is that one knows. If I say, for instance, that I know that eating lots of fruits and vegetables is good for my health, I should be in a position to be able to explain how I know this to a friend who asks me why eating fruits and vegetables is good for my health. There are several different ways to go about explaining this: I can appeal to personal experience, and tell my friend that my overall health has improved since I started eating more fruits and vegetables. Or I can appeal to expert opinion, and refer my friend to some books on diet and nutrition that purportedly offer scientific support for my claim. Either way, I am giving an explanation of why I claim to know what I know.

But why is it important to be able to give explanations for what one claims to know? Well, because if I can't give an explanation for what I claim to know, then for all we know, I may just be lucky. Even if I can't give any explanation for why eating fruits and vegetables is good for me, I may still turn out to be right that eating fruits and vegetables is good for me. But if so, then my being right is a matter of being lucky. And surely we wouldn't want to say that something as important as knowledge should be left up to luck and chance?  

Which brings us back to the infant: Since the infant does not have the words and concepts to describe and label the various sensory experiences, and to try to explain why those experiences are related to obtaining nourishment, it cannot give any explanation of what is happening when it is being breastfed. Which is another way of saying that until the infant acquires the relevant words and concepts, it really does not know that it is obtaining nourishment when it goes through the experiences it goes through in being breastfed.

Maybe you are thinking: Why are you picking on an infant who does not have words or concepts? Surely there is something... low about using words and concepts to charge an infant with not having knowledge when the infant cannot possibly be in a position to use words and concepts to defend itself against this charge? Well, if this is what you are thinking, then I think you misunderstand my intentions. I'm not being snarky or meanspirited here and picking on infants. I am really just trying to show that one cannot have knowledge without words and concepts. And I don't mean "not having knowledge" in a meanspirited or derogatory way: In other words, I don't mean "not having knowledge" in the sort of mean-spirited way in which one may accuse someone of being ignorant or dumb or whatever. I'm just saying that if I happen to be right that words and concepts are indeed necessary for knowledge, then since infants (and other beings that do not possess words and concepts) do not possess words and concepts, they necessarily do not have knowledge.

I said that I was going to try to relate all of this to yoga. Well, I was; I was going to try to say something about how all this might show that we don't actually know yoga when we do our daily practice, because a big part of our daily practice on the mat consists of visceral experiences that we may not (yet?) have the words or concepts to describe and characterize. So, perhaps, when we are on the mat, we become like infants, in a way. Again, please, I don't mean this in a snarky or derogatory way. But I'm a little too blogged-out right now to write much more about this yoga connection. So I'll have to leave things at this, and maybe (?) write a follow-up post to this in the future. Please forgive me: I think I just baited and switched you in reading a long post about philosophy!

In any case, when all is said and done, it is not always clear that being in a state of not having knowledge of the world is such a bad thing. Consider, for instance, the sentiment expressed in the following poem by Tagore:

On the seashore of endless worlds children meet.
The infinite sky is motionless overhead
And the restless water is boisterous.


On the seashore of endless worlds
The children meet with shouts and dances.
They build their houses with sand,
And they play with empty shells.
With withered leaves they weave
Their boats and smilingly float them
On the vast deep.
Children have their play on the
Seashore of worlds.

They know not how to swim,
They know not how to cast nets.
Pearl-fishers dive for pearls,
Merchants sail in their ships,
While children gather pebbles
And scatter them again.

They seek not for hidden treasures,
They know not how to cast nets.
The sea surges up with laughter,
And pale gleams the smile of the sea-beach.
Death-dealing waves sing
Meaningless ballads to the children,
Even like a mother while rocking her baby's cradle.
The sea plays with children,
And pale gleams the smile of the sea-beach.

On the seashore of endless worlds children meet.
Tempest roams in the pathless sky,
Ships are wrecked in the trackless water,
Death is abroad and children play.
On the seashore of endless worlds is the
Great meeting of children.


we recommend you to buy some goods below for comfort, safety and ease of your yoga activities

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Yogic Menage a Trois, Restraint and Creativity

[Image taken from here]

The fire restrained in the tree fashions flowers.
Released from bonds, the shameless flame
dies in barren ashes.

Rabindranath Tagore

Somewhere in the second half of primary series during practice this morning, these words from Tagore floated into my mind. I can't remember exactly where and in which posture these words came to my mind. This is probably not important anyway, but if I have to hazard a guess, I would go for either Baddha Konasana or Upavista Konasana (or one of the other Konasanas that dot the second half of primary); deep external hip rotator releases usually release correspondingly deep and interesting thoughts. 

Why did these words come to mind? I'm not entirely sure (do we always know why particular words or thoughts occur to us at any particular given moment?), but again, if I have to hazard a guess, I would say that it probably has something to do with this conversation that has been going on lately in the blogosphere about whether Ashtanga is sufficient to meet all our physical (and maybe even mental and emotional) yoga needs, about whether it is "healthy" to "see" other yoga at least some of the time... Well, here's an idea: How about a menage a trois? You know, like maybe you see Ashtanga in the morning, and then go see another yoga in the evening? Actually, isn't this what Grimmly does? Except I think it's the other way around for him: He sees Vinyasa Krama in the morning, and Ashtanga in the evening. So Grimmly is actually a practitioner of yogic menage a trois! Who knew? Ha! Count on me to take cheap shots at Grimmly while he is on his two-week practice/study retreat :-) Moral of the story: Don't leave your blog unattended for two weeks? But really, I don't mean any of this in a bad way; one has to do whatever it is that rocks one's yogic boat. After all, life is too short not to do Whatever Works.  

Btw, I highly recommend this movie.
[Image taken from here]

But coming back to those words from Tagore that occurred to me this morning... over the last few years, I have heard so many people complain about how rigid or "incomplete" Ashtanga is, and jump ship to some other style of yoga (for some reason, Anusara seems to be a common ship to jump to; I'm not sure if this is still true today, though...). One common complaint is voiced in the following way: "I dislike/hate Ashtanga! It's so rigid! Why do I have to do these postures in this particular sequence, and no other? I hate forward bends and hip-openers! Why do we have to do so many of them in the primary series?"Another kind of complaint, which typically builds upon the foregoing one, is that Ashtanga (or at least the primary series) is imbalanced, that its emphasis on forward bends and external hip openers overdevelops certain muscles at the cost of others (a commonly cited example is the psoas and other front-body muscles needed for backbending), that its repetitive nature is probably bad for the knees/wrists/shoulders if practiced over a long period of time. And there are probably many other complaints about Ashtanga, too many to go into here. 
 
I'm not here to try to defend Ashtanga against these complaints. If nothing else, I'm quite sure my fellow Ashtanga Fundamentalists in the blogosphere have already done a very thorough job in this area, one that I cannot hope to surpass. Rather, what I would like to do here is to draw our attention to the spirit behind the seemingly rigid and constraining outer form of Ashtanga. I would like to suggest that the seemingly rigid, repetitive and "boring" nature of Ashtanga practice actually fosters freedom and the blossoming of the spirit rather than restrict it. When one has to get on the mat and do the same series of postures day in and day out for what seems like an eternity, without the option of doing some other postures that one would prefer to do, one is made to stay in the present moment and face directly the challenges--physical, mental or emotional--that these particular postures throw up in one's path. When one is restrained by a limited number of options, one has to find creative ways of working with those options. And it is this creativity that is the flowering of true freedom. I could be wrong about this, but I'm pretty sure that even if one were to jump ship to a different style of yoga, one would still have to devise a productive practice structure to "restrain" oneself and work within. Because without these restraints, one is left without boundaries. And without boundaries, the flame of creativity has no space within which to express itself productively, and runs the risk of exhausting itself and dying in barren ashes.      



we recommend you to buy some goods below for comfort, safety and ease of your yoga activities

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Some thoughts on faith and the practice


"The faith waiting in the heart of a seed
promises a miracle of life
which it cannot prove at once."


Rabindranath Tagore

In my previous post, Megan left a very thought-provoking comment about the relationship between faith and the practice. I think her comment brings up some interesting issues that are worth pondering a little about. Megan writes:

"It seems to me that faith would be detrimental to the yoga practitioner who seeks truth. Faith is a reason to stop asking questions. Faith is an easy way out. Why have faith in a method of practice that is wholly, by its very nature, experiential? My practice is an experiment, both in daily application and in the grander scale. I do this practice and, more specifically, follow THIS method because I am curious, not faithful, about its effects."

I responded by saying that it is quite possible that Megan and I understand very different things by the word "faith". My understanding of faith is based on the Sanskrit word Shraddha, which is usually translated as "faith." B.K.S. Iyengar defines Shraddha as

"trust which comes from revelation, faith, confidence, reverence."

More recently, Kino, in the video above, defines Shraddha more colorfully as "faith to believe in yourself as a divine spark held in the world."

On either definition, faith as shraddha does not preclude inquiry or asking questions. Quite the opposite, in fact: Shraddha encourages active questioning and experimentation based on a spirit of love and trust in the practice, serving as a firm foundation upon which we can freely explore the many joys (and pains) that the practice has to offer. 

On a somewhat different note, Megan's comment has also caused me to wonder if many yogis and yoginis in the west are somewhat apprehensive and hesitant about embracing the concept of faith in the practice, because of the connotations with organized religion and its excesses that the word often conjures up (Note to Megan: I'm not saying this is where you are coming from. I'm just using your comments as a starting point for my neither-here-nor-there musings...). Perhaps the hesitancy has something to do with associating faith with unquestioning belief in a greater power or authority. But I do not think that faith as Shraddha asks us to believe unquestioningly. Rather, my sense is that Shraddha acts as a sort of counterweight to the natural human impulse to explore, expand and experiment; by grounding our minds and spirits in an attitude of love and trust for the process, it protects us from the excesses of ego, which often rears its ugly head when we are preoccupied only with acquiring more knowledge and things. 

These are my two cents', as always. If you have any thoughts on any of this, I'll love to hear them.


we recommend you to buy some goods below for comfort, safety and ease of your yoga activities

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Beggarly Heart, by Rabindranath Tagore

[Image taken from here]

When the heart is hard and parched up,
come upon me with a shower of mercy.

When grace is lost from life,
come with a burst of song.

When tumultuous work raises its din on all sides shutting me out from
beyond, come to me, my lord of silence, with thy peace and rest.

When my beggarly heart sits crouched, shut up in a corner,
break open the door, my king, and come with the ceremony of a king.

When desire blinds the mind with delusion and dust, O thou holy one,
thou wakeful, come with thy light and thy thunder.



we recommend you to buy some goods below for comfort, safety and ease of your yoga activities

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...