• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

International Journal for the Study of New Religions 5.1 (2014) 114–116 ISSN 2041-9511 (print) ISSN 2041-952X (online) doi:10.1558/ijsnr.v5i1.114 A History of Modern Yoga: Patañjali and Western Esotericism, by Elizabeth De Michelis. Continuum, 2004. 282 pages, 14 b&w illustrations. Pb., $49.95, ISBN-13: 9780826487728. Reviewed by Anna Pokazanyeva, University of California, Santa Barbara, [email protected] Keywords yoga, esotericism, Vivekananda, Neo-Vedanta, occultism Elizabeth De Michelis’s work is truly a pioneering study in the growing field that takes on twentieth-century yoga as a subject of serious academic inquiry. De Michelis’s central argument rests on her definition of Modern Yoga as “the graft of a Western branch onto the Indian tree of yoga” that specifically consists of “certain types of yoga that evolved mainly through the interaction of Western individuals interested in Indian religions and a number of more or less Westernized Indians over the last 150 years” (2). This definition leads the author to focus on the presence of these Western esoteric currents within the Bengal Renaissance and the consequent dialogue between Western New Age religion (which, following Wouter Hanegraaf, she dates to the metaphysical/ harmonial movements of the nineteenth century) and Neo-Vedanta as propa- gated by the Brahmo Samaj. Here, Vivekananda emerges as the inheritor of Brahmo Samaj ideology, which forms the seeds of his initial conception of Modern Yoga, as first put forth in his Rāja Yoga (1896). Vivekananda’s role in the creation of the category De Michelis refers to as Modern Yoga is the crux of the present work. The author provides a detailed analysis of Rāja Yoga, arguing that its popularity is responsible for the occult character of Modern Yoga schools. Vivekananda acts not only as a modern- izer, but as an expert synthesizer, who blends Indian Neo-Vendanta with contemporary Western metaphysical thought while grounding the whole in the authority of traditional Advaita philosophy and the “canon” of Classical Yoga. Here, De Michelis’s argument that the original source-text of Patañjali’s Yoga Sūtra has been falsely conflated with the esoteric brand of Vivekananda’s rājayoga is of particular interest. De Michelis points out that this misiden- tification “is very revealing in the present context as it betrays a cognitive confusion which causes a typically esoteric variety of yoga (further occultized by Vivekananda and his followers) to be understood not only in terms of mainstream yoga, but as the most important and universally applicable form of yoga” and further that “if occultistic definitions of yoga have gained enor- mous ascendancy in Modern Yoga circles this will in good part be because © Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014, Office 415, The Workstation, 15 Paternoster Row, Sheffield, S1 2BX Book Reviews 115 the full authority of the Yoga Sūtras has been mistakenly attributed to them” (179). Of course, this argument presupposes that the “full authority” of the Yoga Sūtra is something that can be taken for granted—an assumption that may and should be contested. The idea that Patañjali’s text represents “main- stream yoga” or “the most important and universally applicable form of yoga” is not only a constructed product of early modern Indological scholarship but mutually reinforced by Vivekananda’s own usage. Still, De Michelis is perhaps the first to bring this issue to light, and her perspective is invaluable to any further study of the process that transformed the Yoga Sūtra into the ad hoc canon of Modern Yoga. Perhaps the single most useful contribution of De Michelis’s work is her typology of Modern Yoga. This category is closely associated with the rise of what she refers to as Modern Psychosomatic Yoga (MPsY), which then splinters into more specific subgroups that describe the great variety of yoga schools we observe on the ground today. On the one hand, De Michelis iden- tifies Modern Denominational Yoga (MDY), which encompasses more dis- tinct “guru-based” movements and organizations like ISKCON that exhibit sectarian tendencies and generally tend to have a stricter or more delineated institutional structures and belief systems. These are then distinguished from the two-pronged complex of Modern Postural Yoga (MPY) and Modern Meditational Yoga (MMY). De Michelis tends to speak of both as character- izing distinct schools (Iyengar, Ashtanga, Transcendental Meditation, certain Buddhist Groups) but the labels can also be usefully applied to the profusion of smaller studios and schools that may not belong to a distinct “lineage” or “brand.” Since the publication of her work, De Michelis’s language has become pervasive in the field and has proved to be an invaluable tool in the emerging study of Modern Yoga. Despite its monumentally illuminating history, however, De Michelis’ work largely passes over the impact that hathạ -yogic and tantric traditions have had on the modern body of practice, save for the depreciation they suffered at the hands of the Theosophists and Swami Vivekananda. De Michelis does occa- sionally touch of the appropriation of the hatha-̣ yogic subtle body by Vive- kananda and Western metaphysical groups but the reader is left wondering exactly whence these elements emerge. This omission might be said to reflect a general over-prioritization of Western esoteric influence and a shortage of attention to potential Indian sources. The Theosophists are similarly ignored. Though many of the ideas De Michelis attributes to Vivekananda, including major elements of his “Prānạ Model” and his understanding of ākāśa, appear in earlier Theosophical sources, these remain largely unreferenced. © Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014 116 Book Reviews The other troubling lacuna in a book that aims to present a history of “Modern Yoga” is the apparent failure to account for the origins and the sub- sequent wild popularity of postural practice. Fortunately, this gap has been filled by Mark Singleton’s excellent Yoga Body: The Origins of Modern Posture Practice (2010), wherein he mounts an impressive case for reading modern yoga’s obsession with asana practice as a synthesis of Western and indigenous elements of physical culture, spurred on by a nationalistic project of “man- building.” Singleton’s analysis goes a long way towards beginning to fill the gap which he himself acknowledges in noting that De Michelis’s analysis seems to glide over a full seventy-year gap between Vivekananda’s Raja Yoga (1896) and Iyengar’s Light on Yoga (1966), when postural practice comes out of the woodwork. It should also be noted that significant developments occurred in the United States during the period between Vivekanada’s pres- ence in the country and the appearance of Iyengar and his cohort. For more information on this history, the reader might refer to Paul Hackett’s Theos Bernard, the White Lama (2012), or other recent journalistic but informative works such as Robert Love’s The Great Oom (2010), Stephanie Syman’s The Subtle Body (2010), and Philip Goldberg’s American Veda (2010). Overall, however, this is an extremely useful and illuminating book. De Michelis’s contribution to the field cannot be overstated. Moreover, De Michelis’s style is quite accessible and appeals to academic as well as popu- lar audiences. While her references to Western esotericism will likely remain rather opaque to the popular yoga community, serious practitioners are sure to find much of interest in her historical perspective. © Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014.

Load more

  3

Copy Link