In a recent article titled "Hindu Group Stirs a Debate Over Yoga’s Soul", New York Times has brought into focus the question concerning the origins of yoga which is being hotly debated on various blogs and newspaper columns. The article highlights the recent "Take Back Yoga" campaign launched by the Hindu American Foundation (HAF).
The main concern voiced by HAF is the apparent delinking of yoga from its Hindu roots – "As this $6 billion industry completes one Suryanamaskar (sun salutation) after another, there has been growing concern from the Hindu American Foundation about a conscious delinking of yoga from its Hindu roots ". So the question that is being raised and debated is "Who owns Yoga?". The chief protagonist for the "Take Yoga Back" campaign is Dr. Aseem Shukla, the co-founder of HAF. In the article "Theft of Yoga" published in Washington Post, he chronicles how yoga has been progressively distanced from its roots in Hinduism. He also highlights how the practice of yoga has been watered down to simply ‘asana’ and, maybe, ‘pranayama’ as opposed to its original goal of liberation as given by Patanjali in his Yoga Sutras. He states that while yoga practitioners routines fold their hands in "namaste" (a Hindu greeting), chant "OM" the primordial sound a symbol of Hiduism and practice asanas named after Hindu gods – Hanumanasana or Natarajasana – there is no effort to connect the practice of yoga to their origin, Hinduism. His final statement in the article is, "Hindus must take back yoga and reclaim the intellectual property of their spiritual heritage–not sell out for the expediency of winning more clients for the yoga studio down the street".
The strongest response to the above article by Shukla came from none other than Deepak Chopra in his article "Who Owns Yoga?" in the Huffington Post. He strongly criticized Shukla’s claims and stated that yoga predates Hinduism and therefore has no roots back to Hinduism. Chopra also posted his comments on the article by Shukla in a "letter to the editor" in Washington Post. This has led to this heated debate – "The Great Yoga Debate: Shukla vs Chopra" – with back and forth volley between Chopra and Shukla and many others joining in the fray. Be prepared to spend several hours, maybe days, to read through all the interesting, and sometimes quite enlightening, comments by various contributors.
Roots of Yoga
Let us try to put this whole debate into perspective. We first need to understand what yoga is and then try to trace its roots and understand its origins. Yoga, as practiced today, whether it be Power Yoga, Vinyasa, Flow yoga, Sivananda, Iyengar, Integral or a multitude of other names, can be conveniently grouped under the umbrella name "Hatha Yoga". The most commonly referenced source for all practices under Hatha Yoga is "Hatha Yoga Pradipika" written by Swatmarama. Although the exact date when this text came out is not known, it is usually believed to be somewhere between 600 and 1000 AD. The Pradipika contains instructions and philosophy of yogic practices of asana (physical postures), pranayama (breathing techniques), mudras and bandhas (gestures and energy locks) and cleansing techniques. As stated in the text, the main objective of all hatha yoga practices is to attain the goal of Raja Yoga, which is the philosophy and practice of yoga given by Patanjali in his Yoga Sutras. Once again, there is no definite date known for the Yoga Sutras. I have seen dates mentioned anywhere from 2000 to 5000 years ago.
Patanjali, in the Yoga Sutras, gives the definition of yoga as "chitta vritti nirodhah" or "controlling the fluctuations of the mind-field" (sutra 1.2). When the mind is controlled, one can attain the state of ‘samadhi’ which can lead to ‘kaivalya’ (total freedom). A yogi who has attained the state of Kaivalya, is  believed to have understood the separation between the individual soul (purusha) and the material, non-conscious counterpart (prakriti). This knowledge alone can free the individual from the shackles of birth, death and re-birth and finally provide liberation.
Patanjali’s yoga is one of the six systems of Indian philosophy, called "shad-darshana’ – Nyaya, Vaisheshika, Yoga, Samkhya, Mimansa and Vedanta. These systems of philosophy were derived out of the knowledge embedded in the Vedas and Upanishads. The Vedas are called "shrutis" which means that they were ‘heard’ as opposed to ‘smriti’ which were created by humans. The shrutis represent knowledge which was acquired by these sages in their deep states of meditation.
What is the real issue?
As we have seen above, the roots of yoga can be traced all the way back to the deep rooted Vedic culture. The main debate is whether these roots can be termed Hindu or not. To me it is basically a question of defining what Hinduism is and how it is commonly understood by most people. Both Shukla and Chopra agree that the terms Hindu and Hinduism are very recent in origin (no more than a few hundred years old). The system of religious faith followed in ancient India, which is based on the Vedic culture, is termed ‘Sanatana Dharma’ (the eternal religion). The main point of contention is whether Hinduism is the same as Sanatana Dharma or not. If they are the same, then obviously the roots of yoga go back to Hinduism. Chopra’s contention is that Hinduism, as practiced today, is a later evolution from Sanatana Dharma and that yoga predated Hinduism.
I think most people who practice yoga – whether it is Hatha yoga in its various denominations, Christian Yoga, Kabbala Yoga or even Doggy Yoga – understand and are comfortable with the idea that yoga originated in India a long time ago. Some of the more knowledgeable ones also link hatha yoga back to Yoga Sutras of Patanjali and to the ancient Vedic roots. I believe that for most people, including people of Indian origin, Hinduism is a complex term and difficult to understand and explain. Most people take to yoga purely for physical benefits. In my opinion, it is pointless trying to burden them with an understanding of Hinduism. Those who take up the study of yoga seriously do, sooner or later, discover the deeper meaning of yoga as given in the yoga sutras or the Bhagavad Gita or the Upanishads. From that understanding they can draw their own conclusions as to whether the practice is related to Hinduism or not. As acknowledged by Shukla, Chopra and everyone else, yoga is a huge $6 billion industry and people are flocking to yoga studios and health clubs to derive whatever benefits they ascribe to the practice.
As a yoga practitioner and a yoga instructor, I believe that it is my responsibility to acquaint my yoga students with its history and background and familiarize them with the contents of yoga sutras of Patanjali. That way they will understand that yoga is well beyond simply physical culture and that the deeper benefits of yoga can lead to a more peaceful, fulfilling life and ultimately can lead to the sate of ‘samadhi’ where one can transcend the limitations of the ego-oriented mind and intellect. Whether yoga has its roots in Hinduism, Sanatana Dharma, Vedic culture or ancient Indian culture is something that they can determine for themselves, if they are so inclined.
I was born in a Hindu family and having grown up in India and living in a Hindu society, in my own mind, I see a connection between yoga and various tenets of Hinduism – karma theory, reincarnation, liberation etc. However, I just don’t feel that I am qualified to talk about Hinduism as any such attempt on my part can easily confuse the students and even alienate them from this beautiful practice.
Is there any difference between Hinduism and Sanatan dharma? No, I don’t think so. Both are same. As the purity of the term it was sanatan dharm, which later became Hindu. Some say the Persians used to Pronounce the Sindhu river as Hindu, while some say that in Persian, Hindu means slave, black etc… and the Persians used such term for humiliating the followers of Sanatan dharm who resided across the river Sindhu. Later, the Hindu and Hinduism became synonym for the followers of Sanatan dharm. Thus, I wonder how Deepak Chopra thinks that Yoga is since pre Hinduism.
Finally, yes, the root of Yoga is in Hinduism or Sanatan dharm as the the Rishis who propagated Yoga were Hindus or the followers of Sanatan dharm.
[…] yoga a religion? Many say no, but this is also a contested issue. Undeniably its roots are in ancient Indian (Vedic) culture and religion. Whatever its roots, […]
[…] http://yogawithsubhash.com/2010/12/03/origins-of-yoga-is-yoga-hindu/ […]
Context, context, context.
If we ask where the Vedas and Upanishads came from then a proper context for understanding this entire debate appears.
The answer is that these revealed scriptures of Sanatana Dharma came from ascetics, swamis, sages, hermits seeking enlightenment through intense spiritual practices in the forests and foothills of the Himalayas. They were the source, or, the source was within them. What they found within themselves they spoke to their students, and this was passed down in turn for who knows how many generations in prehistoric India.
How did they come into contact with divinity so as to hear or obtain these revelations of spiritual truth we know as the Vedas and Upanishads?
Why, the same way you get to Carnegie Hall — you practice, practice, practice. These hermits spent their lifetimes cleansing, attuning, and disciplining body, emotion, and mind to be able to sit in deep meditation for great lengths of time, again and again, day after day, all their lives.
This intense lifestyle was aimed at causing enlightenment within the practitioner, and was taught by these sages to their students for who knows how long in prehistoric India. This was entirely an oral tradition back then. This intense lifestyle began with practicing asanas to prepare the body for intense meditation. These asanas are what we know as Hatha Yoga.
This ancient lifestyle was widely known and highly revered throughout India in the era of Patanjali (about 2500 years ago). Patanjali was a great scholar, who codified classical Sanskrit into a rigorously logical grammar, and he also wrote down the teachings of these mountain sages for the first time (that we know of now). It was an 8-step path called Ashtanga Yoga (Eight-Limbed Yoga), of which Hatha Yoga is the second limb.
Deepak Chopra is a Christian-oriented dualist who pushes Creationism in its current wrapping of ‘Intelligent Design’ — the notion that existence requires Some Guy to stick his thumb into things from time to time to make it all go.
That viewpoint is about as far from Sanatana Dharma as you can get. Why would anyone listen to him?
Dear Antifa,
Thank you so much for your candid comments. I think the main point of the debate is whether Hinduism is the same as Sanatan Dharma. I subscribe to the idea that they are the same. There are others who believe that Hinduism is the ritualistic part of the religion that is practiced by a vast majority of Hindus today. This concept of Hinduism is the outgrowth from the Pauranic concepts which are certainly post veda/upanishads. I get a feeling that Deepak Chopra subscribes to the second approach and that is the reason he claims that yoga is pre-Hinduism. Well, it all comes down to defining Hinduism one way or the other.
Dear Subhashji:
This is an intriguing discussion thread. And no matter where it is discussed it will remain intriguing and perhaps never-ending. However, I somehow have difficulty seeing Hinduism as a religion, in terms of what religion means in the west.
A few months ago I stumbled upon a discussion thread on the internet between some enlightened folk discussing converting to Hinduism because they felt positively about the “religion”. One of the discussants said there was an institution on the internet where one could pay $ 200 – $ 300 and get a certificate confirming that the person was a Hindu.
I had a hearty laugh reading about the document certifying that one was a Hindu. However, I felt that I simply HAD to participate in that discussion and so I did. My impression based on the names of the discussants was that they were westerners. I suggested to them that Hinduism is not a religion one seeks conversion to because conversion implies switching from one religion to another while leaving the previous religion behind. And that the discussants need not waste any (more?) money on becoming certified as Hindus because the discussants would be better Hindus if they followed the religious traditions they were raised in faithfully.
Of course if one wishes to adopt the ritualistic elements of Hinduism or Hindu ideas and practices esp. as contained in Vedanta or other aspects of Hindu practices a person is free to do so. But I believe Jnana, Raja, Karma and Bhakti yogas may be practiced from within one’s own religion. Some may wonder why I do not refer to Tantra, this is because I don’t know anything about it.
Keeping the above in view I am sorry Subhashji that that person walked out of your Yoga class upon hearing mention of the concepts of Purusha (consciousness) and Prakriti (nature). As far as I know there never was and there never will be anyone proselytzing Hinduism. That is it’s beauty.
Thank you for a most helpful and stimulating blog.
Dear Biraj,
That indeed is funny – converting to Hinduism for $200! Never heard of that before. It is intriguing that one needs a certificate to prove that one is a Hindu! You are so right that Hinduism cannot be considered being a religion in the same sense as the other religions.
Dear Subhashjee,
Firstly, I must thank you for writing this informative post. On the raging debate, I think both of them are playing to their respective galleries and so not much attention need be paid to them.
On the issue of Yoga and it’s origin, I don’t think there is any room for much confusion. At the same time- as you rightly noted-Yoga is an integral part of Vedic philosophy that has its roots in Sanatana Dharma. I think, it would be best to equate Santana dharma to a large ancient Banyan tree with various branches and roots- Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainish, Sikhism etc to name a few. People who sowed the seeds of that banyan tree did a great duty by not making it rigid-flexibility was it’s essential core….hence the religion continued to evolve over time thereby giving opposers of one or the other an opportunity or flexibility to define and re-define religion to suit their own beliefs. As religions kept branching out of Sanatana Dharma, its very core remained constant and kept emitting light in different directions to illuminate many lives………Just to cut this short, in my view, Sanatana Dharma is the core religion with Hinduism/Buddhism/Jainism/Sikhism etc as its various “ways of life’…….It’s like taking a flight to NewYork from Delhi with an option of taking route via London, Frankfurt, Amsterdam, Tokyo etc etc….Final destination for every traveler is known to him/her; choice of route is something he/she can decide as per his/her own free will…..
If one wants to analyse it further, the various ways coming out of Sanatana Dharma has their own respective subways too- Hindus have a choice of following Lord Vishnu, Lord Shiva, Goddess Parvati and many more, same way goes for Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs (various gurus, teerthankars and forms of Lord Buddha)…..
Essence-Sanatana Dharma is a well nourished and well fed and an ever lasting tree that gives shade to many people…..leaving them with choice and flexibility to sit under any of it’s branches……He/she is sure to get shade and will be well rested.
Regards
Alok
Thanks a lot, Alok, for these nice comments. I agree that we need to recognize Sanatana Dharma as the umbrella under which all other denominations or ‘sampradayas’ have evolved and flourished.
-Subhash
I’m quite entertained reading and watching this debate go on.
I feel that we should always honor our teachers and those that broke ground before us.
While I personally relate more to shiva-shakti Tantra Philisophy more than other spiritual paths…I nod my head to them all… they all came before me!
One love… ultimately I feel we all want to be happy and we all want to be free.
Blessings!
Very true, Tara, we all want to be happy without getting involved in controversy. I have no problem accepting the notion that yoga has Hindu roots. However, I don’t see that as being a factor in practicing yoga and don’t really need to bring it up in my yoga classes. I follow the yoga philosophy which is based on the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali. In the yoga sutras, there is emphasis on learning how to control the mind and to get there one doesn’t need to know what the origin of yoga is.
As a fellow teacher of esoteric practices, although different in nature, I’ve noticed that people are 1- naturally drawn to enlightening practices and 2- are also somewhat afraid of them if those practices are not from their particular religious tradition. I think the value in teaching about the spiritual concepts and origins behind yoga may be that that will bring to the surface basic tenets that are similar or even the same as the beliefs the student already holds. This is especially likely and true if a person has developed some sense of intuition and openness (for example, may be Christian, but does not accept every single belief that their Church has identified as 100% infallible truth.) Seeing common threads in this way can, I’ve noticed, dispel fear.
Thank you so much, Bridget, for your feedback. I fully agree with your premise that when a person has a sense of openness to other ideas, it can certainly help allay fears and dogmas. In my yoga classes I do try to explore the philosophy of yoga and its background and history. Most of my students are pretty open to most of these ideas. In the past, however, I have had the very unfortunate experience when someone with strong Christian beliefs just walked out of my class when I started talking about the basic concepts of ‘purusha’ and ‘prakriti’. Unfortunately, I am not familiar with the basic tenets of Christianity and hence have trouble bringing out any sense of similarities and/or differences with yogic concepts. Like you said, I hope that the student will draw their own parallels between yoga and their own belief system.
The article about Hinduism and yoga as well as the earlier article from Christians criticizing yoga were interesting.
You don’t seem to be trying to promote Hinduism in any way through your teaching. I haven’t even wondered much whether you consider yourself Hindu in a religious way (as opposed to identifying culturally perhaps?)
It seems to me that while making a big deal over the particular cultural origins of yoga contradicts yoga teachings because it encourages and reflects excessive self-awareness in terms of both individual and collective identity.
I think the emphasis should be on spreading whatever understanding one has arrived at and whatever methods one feels may help others to increase our connectedness and the love and compassion we feel for each other and a creative and tranquil environment for all of us.
It is my hope that in our modern world more people will be able to recognize common truths in various faiths and the fact that any faith or practice can be corrupted and that we must each seek to enlighten ourselves. I think this is consistent with a proper understanding of Patanjali and other sages of yoga and other faith traditions.
At times of insecurity, however, people tend to use religion to rally people “like them” against people “unlike them.”
I feel a bit of “an elephant in the room,” (a topic people know is there, but don’t discuss) is how Islam fits into the picture, especially given the historical and current political and cultural antagonism between India and Islam, and between Western powers and Islam. Are there not commonalities between much Islamic philosophy and many Islamic practices and those of yoga? Wouldn’t it be positive to emphasize such commonalities?
As a living philosophy and practice, wouldn’t yoga remain truest to it’s core if it emphasized how its fundamentals are consistent with the liberal practice of other faiths, and helped increase tolerance and understanding?
Hi Roger,
Great observations! you are right when you say that I am culturally related to Hinduism but don’t practice any of the ritualistic aspects of it. I was born in a Hindu family and was raised in India in a Hindu environment. As such, I am sure I have ‘samskaras’ which reflect my Hindu base. However, in the more recent years, since I have taken to the study of yoga seriously, I am trying to mold my life based on the principles and ideologies provided by Patanjali and others as they relate to yoga.
The article “Take back Yoga” by Shukla is an effort to create an awareness that yoga has its origins in Hinduism. I really have no problem with that statement. The issue in my opinion is that Hinduism is not an easy concept to understand and even harder to try and explain it to others. Moreover, all aspects of yoga can be practiced without ever learning much about Hinduism. Some practitioners who study yoga in detail automatically get curious about its roots and may delve into an understanding of the ancient Vedic culture which is what is now being termed as Hinduism.