Phenomenological studies on yoga draw on the work of the French philosopher Merleau-Ponty (Merlau-Ponty, 1945; Morley, 2001, 2008; S. Sarukkai, 2002). In Phenomenology of Perception Merleau-Ponty articulates the concept of the body-subject, which he sees as giving primacy to the body as our primary tool of perception. The human body, as a perceiving thing, is intertwined and intimately related to the world. He asserted that by understanding ourselves, via our bodies, we have a better understanding of the world (Merleau-Ponty, 1945). The phenomenon that we experience (for example, yoga) is affected by the body and its related sensorimotor functions. Due to the changing nature of the body, our sense of the world and of ourselves is continuously shifting. This implies that every individual has a partial view, and that this partial view is informed by the multiple discourses in which that individual participates. The body (or as Merleau-Ponty calls it in his later work “flesh”) “express[es] the continuity between the surface and depth of the world and that of the body” (Morley, 2001, p. 75).
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenges to Western thought. New York: Basic Books.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1945). Phenomenology of Perception. New York: Routledge Classics.
Morley, J. (2001). Inspiration and expiration: Yoga practice through Merleau-Ponty's Phenomenology of the Body Philosophy East & West, 51(1), 73.
Morley, J. (2008). Embodied Consciousness in Tantric Yoga and the Phenomenology of Merleau-Ponty. Religion & the Arts, 12(1-3), 144-163.
Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological Research Methods. London: Sage Publications.
Ogden, P., Minton, K., & Pain, C. (2006). Trauma and the body: A sensorimotor approach to psychotherapy. New York: WW Norton & Company.
Smith, B. R. (2007). Body, mind and spirit? Towards and analysis of the practice of yoga. Body and Society, 13(2), 25-46.
[1] Morley’s work primarily focuses on interpretations of Tantra as understood through rural practitioners of yoga. He is writing to and participating in an audience which is primarily cosmopolitan. Some scholars may argue that it is a stretch to say he is “studying” two groups. I believe his writing shows that he does study contemporary, cosmopolitan perspectives of yoga as well as rural – but this is the subject of a future paper!
[2] My own research interests lie in the intersection of meaning with the body. While I am aware that meaning is not always expressed verbally, especially in the case of traumatic experiences (Ogden, Minton, & Pain, 2006), my interest is in the verbal articulation of meaning that is made about the body.
[3] He attempts to show that Euro-Americans who practice Asthanga Vinyasa Yoga in India are not “mimicking” practices from another culture, but are truly engaged in a form of self-inquiry. What he does not explore (at least not in this limited article), is what they encounter: how or if their practice of yoga is different depending on their culture, religion, gender and socio-economic background. Yet, what yoga “means” to these individuals is not the point of Smith’s study.
Psychologist James Morley applied Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology to yoga in a 2001 article titled, “Inspiration and expiration: Yoga practice through Merleau-Ponty’s Phenomenology of the body.” In this article Morley highlights how researchers could use yoga to better understand the writings of yoga teacher and author T.K.V. Desikachar. Morley’s goal is not to “impose a Western philosophical framework for an established non-Western tradition…[but show that] yoga is an important resource for phenomenologists undertaking future research in the ongoing project prescribed by Merleau-Ponty: namely to bring Western thought “down to earth” by focusing on the lived human body as philosophical and psychological ground” (Morley, 2001, pp. 79-80). What he does not do in this article is tell the reader specifically how yoga will bring our philosophy down to earth, or what researchers should engage in to make this connection between the body, yoga and phenomenology.
Morley followed up on this perspective in a 2008 article titled "Embodied Consciousness in Tantric Yoga and the Phenomenology of Merleau-Ponty" (Morley, 2008). This article makes an important contribution by exploring how class affects both the embodied practice of yoga and how practitioners think about yoga in India. He states that yoga is increasingly popular across the globe, but that contemporary views are predominated by “the new cosmopolitan and media savvy middle classes” who simultaneously view religion with “claustrophobic suspicion” yet “seek contact with the archaic dimension denied them by the alienated lifestyles of industrialized civilization” (Morley, 2008, p. 147). Morley contrasts the way mainstream, middle class Indians see yoga with a Tantric perspective found in the rural settings of India. He clearly shows that while yoga is found throughout India, middle class and rural Indians experience it differently; the meaning they make of yoga is distinct. Morley’s methodological choice to study the way two distinct groups experience yoga, rural and middle class, help him to have a broader view of the way in which yoga is meaningful.[1]
Morley also comments that “Phenomenology needs a somatic methodology that can go beyond academic language” (Morley, 2008, p. 161); the need for a somatic or embodied component to research is echoed by other researchers who will be discussed below. I agree that there is a real and pressing need for a somatic component to research – and to scholarship and academics in general. Yet, this “new” pressing need is also ironic. Most of the literature on neuroscience, psychology, phenomenology and yoga show that there is no separation between mind and body. The dichotomy between mind and body, the Cartesian duality, is understood to be merely illusion (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999; Merleau-Ponty, 1945). If there is no separation between mind and body, do we need new methodologies? Or do we need to focus our existing methodologies on the embodied experience? As a researcher interested in the intersection of the body with meaning making, I may need a refined understanding of when it is easier to collect and analyze data through methods that start with the “the flesh” and when it is best to start with the “mind.” Yet, I believe that it is important to question whether such approaches are merely fostering my colonialist culture’s love of dichotomies.[2]
Yoga studies scholar Benjamin Smith offers the most complete examination of how to analyze the body in his 2007 article "Body, mind and spirit? Towards an analysis of the practice of yoga." Smith draws strongly on the phenomenology of Merleau-Ponty, but also supplements this approach by drawing on the work of Marcel Mauss who was interested in the “the study of bodily techniques themselves” (Smith, 2007, p. 29). Mauss’ emphasis on the role of imitation in teaching bodily techniques led Smith to develop and refine his collection of data by focusing on how “oral, visual and non-verbal instruction [what he calls tactile interventions]” was used by yoga teachers (Smith, 2007, p. 31). Smith also used his own experience of yoga (in Asthanga Vinyasa Yoga, which he is both studying and practicing) to inform his research. His experience and practice of yoga are part of his data collection. He sees his body as a subject of study and data. His body becomes the ground in which he explores the interplay between embodied habits (what Shusterman calls “somatic norms of a culture”), patterns of daily activity, absence of thought about the body and the way one thinks about the world.
Smith’s approach is to capture the experience of the Asthanga Vinyasa Yoga classes in his work. This makes him prioritize “being there,” having the direct experience of the yoga classes – data that is difficult to get merely by observing or interviewing. He is also interested in both the students and teachers perspectives; how they come together to make a community of practice intent on understanding yoga.
Smith’s primary contribution to the emerging field of “Yoga Studies” is that he sees and (better yet) clearly articulates that yoga is, already, a “mode of self-inquiry and self-encounter” (Smith, 2007, p. 40)[3]. I think that what Smith is pointing to is the way in which yoga practice by the researcher can enhance or be an essential aspect of reflectivity in research. Writing about real lives draws issues of power and vulnerability to the forefront of our struggle to convey observations, and insights to a wider audience. Where and how do we position ourselves? And others? Every decision made unveils our self as a writer, observer, academic and ultimately, human.
References
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenges to Western thought. New York: Basic Books.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1945). Phenomenology of Perception. New York: Routledge Classics.
Morley, J. (2001). Inspiration and expiration: Yoga practice through Merleau-Ponty's Phenomenology of the Body Philosophy East & West, 51(1), 73.
Morley, J. (2008). Embodied Consciousness in Tantric Yoga and the Phenomenology of Merleau-Ponty. Religion & the Arts, 12(1-3), 144-163.
Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological Research Methods. London: Sage Publications.
Ogden, P., Minton, K., & Pain, C. (2006). Trauma and the body: A sensorimotor approach to psychotherapy. New York: WW Norton & Company.
Smith, B. R. (2007). Body, mind and spirit? Towards and analysis of the practice of yoga. Body and Society, 13(2), 25-46.
[1] Morley’s work primarily focuses on interpretations of Tantra as understood through rural practitioners of yoga. He is writing to and participating in an audience which is primarily cosmopolitan. Some scholars may argue that it is a stretch to say he is “studying” two groups. I believe his writing shows that he does study contemporary, cosmopolitan perspectives of yoga as well as rural – but this is the subject of a future paper!
[2] My own research interests lie in the intersection of meaning with the body. While I am aware that meaning is not always expressed verbally, especially in the case of traumatic experiences (Ogden, Minton, & Pain, 2006), my interest is in the verbal articulation of meaning that is made about the body.
[3] He attempts to show that Euro-Americans who practice Asthanga Vinyasa Yoga in India are not “mimicking” practices from another culture, but are truly engaged in a form of self-inquiry. What he does not explore (at least not in this limited article), is what they encounter: how or if their practice of yoga is different depending on their culture, religion, gender and socio-economic background. Yet, what yoga “means” to these individuals is not the point of Smith’s study.
0 comments:
Post a Comment