3. His principle of interpretation: the original text versus his own Yoga-experience

Of course, Iyengar´s assertion of practising "pure Astanga Yoga" sounds overstated and often combative in tone. This exaggeration can be understood only when read in the context of the criticism he had to put up with all his life, which reproached him for being imperfectly rooted in the Yoga tradition. Aside from that, as part of the social role of the Guru which he usually plays when making speeches, Iyengar never says "perhaps" and "probably", but rather tends to speak in terms of absolute certainty. This kind of behaviour is not necessarily pure vanity, since in Indian society a Guru is more or less expected to act like this.

But who can claim to know what pure Astanga Yoga is? The Yoga Sutras are multifaceted and opaque, and like every historical document they are only with us having passed through a history of interpretations and reinterpretations. Doesn´t Iyengar himself say, that his view of Astanga Yoga is influenced by the Gita, Hatha-Yoga texts, Upanisads etc...which are hardly compatible with Patanjali´s Yoga ?

The basic question here is: What does purity mean ? It is a very superficial understanding of purity if one thinks something only remains pure as long as it is repeated in the same way. A thing is pure insofar as it remains in unity with its primary source and essence and therefore is not alienated to itself. In the flow of time such an identity is only possible if the thing changes, always showing itself in a fresh and new way. And for that reason if we want to preserve the purity of something we have to keep it alive by transforming it according to new ways of understanding, which fit to our time and experience.

And that is what Iyengar tries to do in his interpretation of Patanjali. He says: "The Sutras of Patanjali have attracted considerable attention and there are many commentaries on it. Most of the commentators have seen the subject of Yoga objectively or from the academic angle. On the other hand, I have responded to it subjectively, comparing my feelings and experiences with the original text through uninterrupted practise and refinements." [3]

According to this statement he wants to disclose the essence of Patanjali in a new way by using two principles of interpretation. Firstly he stays close to the original text, not to the more academic commentaries, which are not personally involved in their subject. Secondly he compares the message of the text with his own experience in practising and refining Yoga. By studying the tradition he tries to improve the understanding of his own way, giving clear priority to experience in practising and teaching: "Though I am rational, I am tradition-bound and sentimental. I trust the statements of others and follow their line of explanations and repeat the experiments to gain experience. If the experience tallies with their expressions, I accept their statements. Otherwise I discard theirs, live on my own experiments and experiences, and make my pupils feel the same as I felt in my experiments. If many agree, then I take it as a proven fact and impart it to others." [4]

Iyengar considers his way as traditional Yoga in that he regards the Yoga Sutras, particularly the eight-limbed path, as a suitable categorial framework of Yoga in general and of his special method, too. In this he takes the liberty of unconventionally reinterpreting the Sutras from his experiences, taking Yoga practise and teaching into a testing ground for the thoughts written down in the old texts.

[3]   Ibid.
[4]   Ibid. p. XXVII