|
|
| Hello
Most people start an argument about just anything, here is one of those things and I don't really understand what is this discussion about. Yoga is a kind of fitness. As long as you actually do something to burn off those exessive calories you are on the right track. A bit of yoga after sport won't do any harm and a bit fitness neither. Talking about fitness or yoga doesn't get you any further though. 
And taking on something only because a star or starlet is doing is not the most recommended way of enhancing your body. Every body is unique and not every one's body reacts the same way to the same treatment. If you want to lose weight you need to monitor your feeding patterns as well as the amounts you are used to eat. Then try to counter balance the amount of calories with exercise and you are on the right track.
Important is to drink a lot of water. And I mean a lot. In a colder climate around 20 degree celsius or less 2 liters of water a day. A class every hour will do. Drink two or three glasses of water before every meal and you'll most likely slim down. Try not to eat little chocolates or other sweets. Just don't! 
kind regards
Arnego2
weightlosingvacation
Edited by arnego2 2006-10-21 6:39 AM
|
|
| |
|
| Yoga is DEFINATELY NOT a kind of fitness.
Asana is ONE of the 8 branches of yoga and if you don't approach it with a meditative approach or an attention to the breath, then it's simply gymnastics.
Yoga is nothing to do with fitness. Or even weight loss.
The advice on drinking water and not eating chocloate and so in is quite sensible though.
|
|
| |
|
| Yoga is not kind of fitness,but fitness is kind of yoga,at least yogasana.
As such,especially ashtanga vinyasa,can be for weight loss and most
certainly can be a substitute for fitness,even better than fitness is.
Not all people are interested in getting enlightened and reaching kaivalya ,
most of them are interested in losing weight, strenghtening their body core,
improving balance,becoming flexible,becoming healthier all together.. And
with certain yoga schools,that`s just what you`ll get.
Edited by LNP20 2006-10-21 9:37 AM
|
|
| |
|
| I am VERY new to yoga, but couldn't it be considered a "mental" fitness? I feel that it could contribute to weight loss, because in learning to respect and be in tune with your body, the next natural step would be to watch what you put into your mouth.
|
|
| |
|
| Mika - 2006-10-21 1:47 PM
I am VERY new to yoga, but couldn't it be considered a "mental" fitness? I feel that it could contribute to weight loss, because in learning to respect and be in tune with your body, the next natural step would be to watch what you put into your mouth.
Not just from that aspect, but if you ever start doing full ashtanga series or some other
dynamic yoga approaches on a very regular basis ,on a psyhical level you will gain a lot
of core strenght,flexibility,condition, and you will sweat like a pig that will most surely
result in burning the fat and calories and finally at losing weight if that`s your goal.
You can also gain weight and muscles if that`s your goal,but that requires different
feeding approach.
I think no fitness is as hard as vinyasa yoga on advanced levels. I know some fitness
trainers with experiance , and they couldnt go through the first series at once first time
they tried it. So that speaks something for itself |
|
| |
|
| What is "fitness?" We should have a common definition of the terms we use. People tend to just define fitness as whatever they do or anything that resembles exercise. People rarely discuss all of the following physical adaptations, nor do they weigh them equally. However, we should look at "fitness" as promoting all of the following in equal measures: 1. Cardio-vascular and cardio respiratory endurance (gas exchange); 2. Stamina (muscular endurance); 3. Strength; 4. Flexibility; 5. Power; 6. Speed; 7. Coordination; 8. Accuracy; 9. Agility; and 10. Balance. Yoga will promote some, but not all, of those physical adaptations.
Why do people say that yoga without breathing or meditation is "just gymnastics?" As if gymnastics is something bad or something that is easier than (or less than) yoga. Would we be comfortable with people saying yoga is just gymnastics with all the difficult elements taken out? If we are being good little yogis we shouldn't denegrate a beautiful and challenging practice like gymnastics.
Why do we continue to promote the falicy that every body is unique? Genetically, we have far more in common with each other than we have differences. We look for (and therefore), find differences in everything from skin color to hair color. But if we looked for all the ways we are the same, we wouid find far more similarities. Yoga is about union...not separation. We are not unique. We are not snowflakes. Generally speaking what is good for one body is good for another body (to greater or lesser degrees). We all need 1. Cardio-vascular and cardio respiratory endurance (gas exchange); 2. Stamina (muscular endurance); 3. Strength; 4. Flexibility; 5. Power; 6. Speed; 7. Coordination; 8. Accuracy; 9. Agility; and 10. Balance. How much we have of each of those physical traits and how much we need may differ by degree but we all still need them.
|
|
| |
|
| YogaGuy - 2006-10-21 6:53 PM.
Why do we continue to promote the falicy that every body is unique?
Because it isn't a fallacy. Strictly speaking, we are ALL unique, although, as you say, our similarities vastly outweigh our differences. 
(sorry, the logician in me had to say that )
But yes, I just love your response. I'd like permission to quote it on my yoga blog (with proper reference, of course).
|
|
| |
|
| YogaGuy - 2006-10-21 7:53 PM
Why do we continue to promote the falicy that every body is unique?
If you want to find out why,I`d strongly suggest you to watch Paul Grilley`s Anatomy
For Yoga DVD. The main idea that is clearly stated through a wide range of demonstrations,
that not all people can reach the same kind of flexibility, and the factor that has the most
influence on it is that we all have different place where bone hits another bone. So you can
break muscle tension, but changing the place where one bone hits the other is very
hard to impossible task,and maybe could only be changed in early stages of
life while body is still forming itself. But even then, people can be genetically
predispositioned to be flexible or not to be so. So having that on mind,
each body is unique, cause we all have different ranges of motions and
places where our bones hit on the other bones, and the pose that works
on one kind of body can be totally different or destructive to the other
type. For example,some people no matter how much they practice can
never achieve full kapotanasana,their spine just and places where vertebrae
hit in each other just wont let them. So why should they strive for years to
achieve it, if they simply cant? It`s better for them to dedicate themselves
to some asanas which are more compatible for their body type. The point is,
to drop dogmatics and find what works best for you or your body
Edited by LNP20 2006-10-22 11:36 AM
|
|
| |
|
| By chance I came accross this, it might be interesting:
http://www.swamij.com/ancientyoga.htm
Gymnastics is great if you want to be doing gymnastics. No harm there. But here's a quote:
Swami Chidananda Saraswati, head of the internationally known Sivananda Ashram (Divine Life Society) in Rishikesh, India explains that:
"Yoga is not mere acrobatics . Some people suppose that Yoga is primarily concerned with the manipulation of the body into various queer positions, standing on the head, for instance, or twisting about the spine, or assuming any of the numerous odd poses which are demonstrated in the text-books on Yoga. These techniques are correctly employed in one distinct type of Yoga practice, but they do not form an integral part of the most essential type. Physical posture serve at best as an auxiliary, or a minor form of Yoga."
Edited by DownwardDog 2006-10-22 5:18 PM
|
|
| |
|
| I own the DVD. You missed the point of my post and the DVD. If we were truly unique, yoga would not work for everyone. However, it does. The point is that our needs in yoga, fitness and most things differ by degree not by kind. The point of the Paul Grilley DVD is that our yoga should be scaled and modified for different people.
My point is that the shape of our bones doesn't make us different and unique. On a fundamental and genetic level we are basically the same. Yes, people have limits and some people have body types that facilitate different attributes. Being able to bend farther than someone doesn't distinguish you from your fellow human in a meaningful way.
To DownDog:
Again I ask why is it "mere acrobatics?" Why does a swamy have to denegrate acrobatics to sell yoga?
|
|
| |
|
| I never said "mere" acrobatics or gymnastics.
I don't see this as a chance to bash gymnastics or anything.
Mr Iyengar in Light on life does however say that yoga without the other branches of yoga taken into consideration is mere gymnastics. Other teachers have also said the same thing.
I guess it's up to the individual. I try to bring yoga off the mat, into my life. The westernisation of yoga has often been blamed for it's "degenaration" into a purely physical pursuit. Could be.
Either way I still think that choosing to do asana alone isn't yoga. It's a small part of a big thing which is yoga.
Edited by DownwardDog 2006-10-23 4:39 AM
|
|
| |
|
| DownwardDog - 2006-10-22 5:08 PM
Swami Chidananda Saraswati, head of the internationally known Sivananda Ashram (Divine Life Society) in Rishikesh, India explains that:
"Yoga is not mere acrobatics . Some people suppose that Yoga is primarily concerned with the manipulation of the body into various queer positions, standing on the head, for instance, or twisting about the spine, or assuming any of the numerous odd poses which are demonstrated in the text-books on Yoga. These techniques are correctly employed in one distinct type of Yoga practice, but they do not form an integral part of the most essential type. Physical posture serve at best as an auxiliary, or a minor form of Yoga."
I'm not looking to pick a fight. I just think it's funny that yoga people denegrate gymnastics and acrobatics all the time. I fully believe that yoga is more than just asana practice. However, I am also very aware that gymnastics and acrobatics require tremendous physical strength and skill beyond what most yogis develope. Furthermore, it is my understanding that at the Mysore Palace in India, Krishnamacharya, Jois and Iyengar used to watch and learn from British gymnasts (http://www.yogajournal.com/wisdom/466_1.cfm). So I think it is funny that other yogis poopoo gymnastics when some other great yogis have actually learned from gymnasts and many gymnastic skills have been filtered down through the Krishnamacharya lineage.
It seems to me that as yogis we should have an open mind toward gymnastics, acrobatics and other physical mediums. Yes, we should breathe. Yes, we should meditate. However, we should also open our minds and use our bodies. |
|
| |
|
| Yes I agree basically with what you're saying.
I don't think yogis will go as far as gymnasts because it's not what they're striving for. Observing gymnasts, contortionists even is fine and actually really interesting, I love watching. I agree that some asanas are exactly the same, but then the pranayama for example is the same basically as the techniques used by freedivers. I think the purpose of doing asana is different than it is in gynmastics and so on though. |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 8442
    
| I find that it is important not to read our own meanings into words such as "mere." When I see that used by BKS, I take it to mean not that gymnastics are inferior, but simply that yoga has more to offer, which is true. I had merely plain yogurt and oatmeal this morning because I chose not to add a lot of other things. It was good - less good than when I add fruit and stuff? No, but "less than" it is other days. It is like when someone arrives in your home and says "it's just me." when they mean they arrived alone, not that their presence is unimportant. 
BKS often warns us not to think unkindly of people who start practicing yoga for their physical wellness because he imself started for that reason and it took a long time for him to understand the depth of the practice. I am happy to help my students feel better in their bodies and I know that when it is time they will move toward the deeper work of yoga. |
|
| |
|
| Actually there's a difference here between Yoga as design and Yoga as applied. In application yes yoga IS used as a fitness activity. No, actually ASANA is used. Yoga is not used at all. In fact YOGA is not used at all by many yoga studios and practitioners alike. Asana. We are talking about Asana. And this is an important clarification.
Yoga is not fitness neither by application or design. Asana on the other hand, in application, is used as fitness. While I don't care for the application it seems here to stay. And one of the elements of yoga is that it provides each of it's practitioners a UNIQUE way to grow, transform, progress, find samadhi (or more). It is not one size fits all and every pose does not the practitioner serve. We must look past the bio-mechanics and the physical.
Gymnastics and yoga, when yoga is comprehensive and based on classical text, is the proverbial comparison of Apples and Garlic. There's nothing "wrong" with gymnastics. But gymnastics is not a subtle science of the body moving the serious practitioner closer to their true self, their spirit, their soul, their yogic dharma. Therefore there's no context in which to talk about yoga and gymnastics. They are not of the same Genre. Talk about yoga and western medicine, talk about yoga and Eastern Medicine. Talk about yoga and any other comprehensive wellness program. If you must talk about yoga and gymnastics talk about gymnastics and asana. Asana is not yoga. Let's be clear on that.
I'd also like to weigh in on the "we are all unique" topic. While I'm not a scientist I think it's fair to say that two humans (who are not twins) rarely have identical DNA profiles. We are all unique. It's not to say we don't have commonalities as a species. It is to say that within that commonality there is very distinct, marked difference. This is not an obstacle to union. Union in a yogic context is relative to the union of the body. mind, soul, of the practitioner. It is only after this individual union is reached that a more universal union can be discussed. It is not about each human melding with ever other human. Nor is it about detaching from every other human.
on to Calories....
As I've mentioned, the burning of calories is quite misunderstood. You burn calories while you sleep. This is not fitness. Fitness is a condition of wellness. Said condition implies a whole body wellness. This includes internal organs and mental well being. Can you, with buns of steel and rippling abs but multiple personalities call yourself fit? The same person with a poorly functioning pancreas, is this person "fit"? The idea that lean muscles mass (power, stength, quickness, agility) IS fitness is foolish (and commonly put forth by well trained and well intentioned "personal trainers" of which many are my good friends . Well marketed I admit, better than being obesse I admit, but it, by itself is not fitness.
Edited by purnayoga 2006-10-23 11:03 AM
|
|
| |
Yoga or Fitness?
