Saturday, May 7, 2011

Some idle musings on the Ashtanga Founding Story

"A lie is more comfortable than doubt, more useful than love, more lasting than truth."

Gabriel Garcia Marquez

In response to my earlier post questioning the importance of lineage in our practice, both Patrick and Claudia have suggested that holding on to the Ashtanga Founding Story (the one involving the Yoga Korunta and its getting eaten by ants; I'm going to use "AFS" to refer to this story for the rest of this post) has a valuable and powerful effect on our practice, even if it is not a historically true story. For instance, Patrick says:

"I believe... that there's something powerful to telling the legend even if we think it's not historically accurate, the same way that reading the Ramayana et al. still has power which is not (and not supposed to be) factual."


I think both Patrick and Claudia are on to something; just because something is not literally, historically true does not mean that it cannot have a powerful and valuable effect on the practice as experienced by us practitioners.

I would like to explore this issue a little further. I would like to suggest that there is actually a difference between the sort of accepting that takes place when we accept the AFS while knowing that it is probably not fully historically accurate, and the sort of accepting that takes place when we accept the Ramayana while knowing that it is very, very unlikely to be historically accurate.

What is the difference? In listening to and accepting the stories in the Ramayana, we do so while fully acknowledging that most (or maybe almost all) of the events in these stories cannot possibly have occurred in historical time. For instance, I take it that none of us actually believe that there once lived a monkey-faced being who once traversed the distance between the island of Sri Lanka and the Himalayas in a single leap. But when we accept the AFS, we deliberately allow the lines between historical reality and possible fiction to be fudged. There are certain persons and events whom we are certain existed in historical time: Krishnamacharya, Pattabhi Jois, specific locations and particular historical events, etc. And there are certain things whose existence we cannot possibly verify for ourselves, but must accept based on faith in the veracity of the AFS: The existence of the Yoga Korunta is one such example. And then there are events that have an air of magical realism around them; events whose occurrence is, strictly speaking, logically and physically possible, but whose probability and motivations leave us in a state of head-scratching puzzlement. The purported eating of the Yoga Korunta by ants is one prime example. Such an event is, of course, logically and physically possible, but certain questions inevitably come up: Why would Krishnamacharya or Guruji leave such an important document as the Korunta unattended in a place for so long as to enable ants to devour it (I honestly don't know how long it takes a bunch of ants to eat a manuscript up, but I would imagine it is not something that happens in an instant)? If the Korunta were such an important document, why wouldn't somebody have thought to make extra copies of it, so that if, God forbid, the original were to get eaten by ants (which did happen, of course), there would still be copies around for posterity to look at?      

Perhaps these are just the musings of an idle, overstimulated mind. Perhaps I am being disrespectful in asking these questions. My apologies, if this is so. I guess what I'm trying to say is, in accepting the AFS, we are not simply listening to a compelling fiction and extracting lessons from it, as we are doing with the Ramayana; nor are we fully accepting the AFS as hard historical fact (unless, of course, we are willing to simply swallow as hard historical actuality the magical realistic possibility of the Korunta getting eaten by ants). Rather, in accepting the AFS, our minds seem to be doing something in between these two modalities: We accept the AFS as if it is hard historical fact, allowing it to shape our lives and practices with the full import that hard historical facts typically convey; yet in some corner of our minds, we acknowledge the fantastical element of the story, and recognize this element as such. How is this possible? Or perhaps more importantly: Why do we do this to ourselves? Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that this is a bad thing; if accepting this story shapes our lives for the better, it might very well be one of the best things that can happen to us. But it still baffles me nonetheless, that we should seem to settle so comfortably into this rather ambiguous space between fact and fiction.        

4 comments:

  1. Hm, I feel that this becomes a bit absurd almost (no offense though!) - as I'm just not sure it's possible for me to sort of accept the founding story while at the same time not believing in it. It's a bit like saying I should accept the existence of God (or, as you suggest, Hanuman) while not believing it. Though I certainly have no problem with the story floating around either, myths can be fun, as long as people don't use it to beat others over the head with it and get all upset if one disputes the truth of it. On the other hand, I'm just reading the Guruji book and I was quite interested and happy to see that several of the senior teachers have absolutely no issue with saying that the founding story may or may not be true. (It would be somewhat upsetting if people I look up to insisted upon the truth of it, as if THAT's what's important.) As they pointed out - it really doesn't matter. What matters is that the yoga works, that the people practicing it happy/feel good/healthier.

    Oh, and just a curious little regional note of significance with respect to the ants before I go: I can actually very much relate to the ant situation, because in Pakistan it's virtually impossible to keep your books, papers, floors even! out of the mouths of ants. We've now made bookshelves with aluminum sheets hidden behind the wood to protect the books, but I doubt Krishnamacharya and Guruji had the means to get that fancy... And sometimes you don't realize before you take the book out of the shelf because they eat the inside first. So if it was, as was indicated in Guruji, lying for a long time in a dusty old library, it's quite likely it had been eaten. Just sayin' ;)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Nobel, first of all, I want to say to Pakistani ashtangi, Oh mY! wow! they eat the books from inside? wow!, that I did not know... what a drag!

    Nobel, I appreciate how you treat this, and I guess I am with you when you say towards the end: "if accepting this story shapes our lives for the better, it might very well be one of the best things that can happen to us".

    Take for example the Yoga Rahasya... THAT is another interesting story.... Krishnamacharya went to the place where one of his ancestors was supposed to dictate this sacred text to someone who "missed his appointment". Instead, it was Krishnamacharya that went there and when he arrived at this sacred temple he fell into a sort of coma? and had a vision of the sage (and his ancestor) come to him and dictate the book.

    He then recited it by heart, all he could remember for years, till one day he wanted to teach it to his son who did not think much of it, so finally put it on paper in 1965... I got my copy yesterday.

    Fantastic stories catch our imaginations, they sparkle the divinity, the miracle possibility, they flash at what we want to believe is behind the courtain (wizard of oz).

    In the end, I don't know about you, but in my case, since I started practicing ashtnga yoga my life became a whole lot better, the improvements are as stunning as undeniable... that is the real mark. Myth or no myth, it is working...

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hello Pakistaniashtangi,
    interesting points you bring up. In particular, it is interesting that several of the senior teachers have absolutely no issue with saying that the founding story may or may not be true. But I still can't help thinking that there is quite of bit of ambivalence involved in accepting and believing certain things (or not). Or maybe it's just me. I don't know. I need to think about this some more.

    I didn't know the ants eat the books from the inside. This is very interesting. Thanks for sharing.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hello Claudia,
    the Yoga Rahasya story is very interesting. I've heard that before too. Don't you think there's a certain air of magical realism there too? Which is not a bad thing. I'm just saying...

    I like what you said here: "Fantastic stories catch our imaginations, they sparkle the divinity, the miracle possibility, they flash at what we want to believe is behind the courtain (wizard of oz)." Very beautifully said :-)

    ReplyDelete