|
|
| I feel a bit foolish asking this question about basic alignment, but I had a most amazing realization come over me in class this morning, and so I wanted to get opinions on whether my "new" understanding was correct or not. In parsvakonasana (as well as trikonasana and virabhadrasana II) the back leg is in internal rotation, as opposed to the front leg's external rotation, yes? For some odd reason this has never been exactly clear to me as such. These poses (left leg forward mainly) have also always caused me a great deal of discomfort in my S/I joint, yet with the teacher's correction to me this morning, I was finally both stable and painfree for once. All she said was to turn my back leg hip point (ASIS) down to the floor a bit. I took the entire leg with the joint (for a change) and wow! No creaking and grinding! I've been trying to find a specific statement about the back leg rotation in the books I have, as well as online, but oddly enough, all I find is information about the front leg. Point the front knee between the 3rd and 4th toes, tuck the front buttock deeply, deepen the groins, and of course, externally rotate the front leg from the hip. But about the back leg? The only instructions I've found say just to keep it strong and straight, outside edge of the foot pressing into the floor to lift the arch and inner thigh. As I'm observing myself in how I've always done this pose, I go into external rotation on the back leg as well as the front, without even trying. Sure, I've had the instruction to send the buttocks back behind me, but that wouldn't change the rotation of that back thigh for me either. So unless I'm refering to my body parts wrong, it's about the external rotators on the back leg holding the leg in internal rotation, or at least keeping it from going into external rotation, correct? My internal rotators are very stretched out (i.e. weak) and the externals are rather tight (though I don't know about whether they're strong), and this I know from the work I've been doing supine with the strap (supta pagangusthasana, etc.). So then I think this is now why I've always dumped all my weight to the front leg, no matter how strongly I would engage the back leg, because the alignment was wrong back there from the get-go. Make sense to anyone?? |
|
| |
|
| Was this in your Anusara class?
|
|
| |
|
| well, yes.  |
|
| |
|
| Yes, in Anusara. Why? |
|
| |
|
| OrangeMat - 2007-08-16 11:04 PM
Yes, in Anusara. Why?
Because your description was classic Iyengar, so I just assumed...
|
|
| |
|
| Well I had looked in LOY and HE didn't help me either! Classic Iyengar, eh? Maybe it's finally time to take one of those classes after all.... |
|
| |
|
| I have studied with three different senior Iyengar teachers, all of whom said (unless my memory is way off) that the back leg should be externally rotated (back leg thigh lifted and externally rotated). If in Utthita Parsvakonasana or Virabhradrasana II you want your hips on the same plane as your front leg/thigh, you must externally rotate both thighs and open your hips. Otherwise, your pelvis will be at an angle and your back knee will be facing down, not towards the side of the room. Some people, due to tightness of the hips, cannot face their pelvis towards the side of the room with the front leg facing forward and need to angle their pelvis/hips slightly, but they should still be trying to externally rotate their thighs and face their back knee towards the side of the room within that hip/pelvis placement. |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 8442
    
| Yep - external rotation. But if it is painful, clearly there is a need to back it off a bit. |
|
| |
|
| jimg - 2007-08-15 7:08 PM Otherwise, your pelvis will be at an angle and your back knee will be facing down, not towards the side of the room. OK, this is good.  When I externally rotate my right leg (back leg), the knee is pointing diagonally UP, almost to the ceiling. When I internally rotate it (or not externally so much), it faces directly to the side. There's never a case when it faces down to the floor. So does this mean I'm already externally rotated on that leg in that position without even trying? |
|
| |
|
| From your description, it sounds to me like you are, as you said, externally rotating your back leg too much, probably just because that is the way your unique (unique just like everybody else) body works. For me, the bottom line is that your forward knee faces straight forward (positioned directly over your front ankle) and your back leg is straight (with a lifted thigh, not a locked knee) with the back knee facing directly towards the side of the room. Since you may be naturally externally rotated to the point where your back knee faces up, your teacher is probably telling you to internally rotate it so that your unique alignment is correct. (Most of us need to externally rotate our back knee.) Also look at your feet. Is your front foot facing straight forward and your back foot at about a 90 degree angle with the heel somewhat farther back (about an inch) than the toes? Make sure that your back foot toes are not farther back than your back foot heel as you want about a 85 degree angle not a 95+ degree angle. I hope that this is making some sense. |
|
| |
|
| OrangeMat - 2007-08-15 2:17 PM
I feel a bit foolish asking this question about basic alignment, but
THERE ARE NO FOOLISH QUESTIONS!!! There are, however, foolish answers. |
|
| |
|
Location: London, England | Hi Om,
I'm afraidyou are a bit confused about internal hip rotation-the ASIS has no bearing whatsoever on whether the hip joint is rotating internally or externally-in fact if you turn your ASIS towards the floor, assuming the leg and foot stay in the same position, you will be externally rotating the hip more than if your ASIS faces the wall. But if the leg is re-positioned as well, then there is no change in the hip rotation.
I would imagine your SI hurts because you are allowing shear foces across the joint to open it up and leave it unprotected by the muscles that cross it-probably, turning to face the floor will change the vectors across which these forces act. That's all well and good, unless it merely masks an on-going problem, and may even eventually contribute to the injury. The muscles across the joint may be thought of as rigging on a upright pole-too much tension, or too little, in any of the muscles, results in the pole being made more unstable-so the rigging is dysfunctional.
Areally good way of illustrating this, and this would be a good exercise in a yoga workshop which addressed spinal/SI issues (I may have told you this one before), is to take a fishing rod, stand it upright, you stand beside it, and press down on it with the flat of your hand-how much pressure does it take before the rod buckles? Then you attach guy wires to the rod, and pull them all to the same tension-it should now take much more pressure to buckle the rod (spine). But if you over-tighten, or slacken off, one or more of the wires, then again, the rod will buckle more quickly.
So I would say that when you practice parsvakonasana and it hurts, then one of two things must be happening-probably both:
A) The positioning of your skeleton is opening the SI joint
B) The muscles are improperly tensioned
To protect the joint, you need to learn to do something called counter-nutation-this is what you see students do when they tilt the pelvis in forward bends, walking the sit-bones back away from the heels-it counter-nutates the sacrum, and closes the joint surfaces (this is called 'close packed'). You see it again in backbends, where the hip joints are extended, allowing the sacrum to be suspended in a perfect equilbrium-then the spine can be positioned without pain-I'm sure you do these things all the time in your own practice. I think we were talking about doing the plank pose once, and you said that it hurt-this is most likely an example of how sacral nutation, which opens the joint, leads to pain though instability.
If you like, I could jot down some of my thoughts on this posture, and see if they tally up with your understanding of it.
Take care
Nick |
|
| |
|
| Hi Nick, So I'm confused, am I? The bony front point of the hip, the crest of the hip, whatever you call it, that's the part that the teacher adjusted so it would face more downward than upward on my back leg (right leg). The front of the quad and knee of that same leg went along with that adjustment, so in essence the entire leg and hip were turned down to face the wall across from me. Does this make sense? The pain I experience is isolated to the left side of my SI, only when the right leg is the back leg. You mentioned plank, and it's the same thing: when I lift my right leg off the floor (three-limbed plank) the left side crunches. I'm right-handed, so it makes sense that my right side in general is stronger. OK, counter-nutation and pelvis tilting in forward bends -- I think I understand that "close-packed" thing, but not sure. When I would forward bend in class, the teacher would come and try to squeeze my lowback smaller, for the lack of a better term. What it feels like is my sitbones are separating too much and the tailbone is going along with them to point at the ceiling. So now I try to send the sitbones vertical while taking the tailbone to the floor, and I even get a hamstring stretch for a change! But I'm not sure which way my pelvis is tilting when I'm folded and upsidedown like that. Hmm, I'm trying to correct for too much of an anterior tilt, yes? Bony hip points(OK, that's not the ASIS, sorry) are moving too far forward, so that's anterior, got it. Back to parsvakonasana, if the back leg is supposed to be in external rotation, then I must be doing it with no effort, and even overdoing it, because when I try to rein it back a bit, I get no pain and the rest of the pose finally feels right. You're saying it's because my SI is opening. Same thing, and honestly, I already knew that. What I didn't know what how to stop it in that position. |
|
| |
|
| i think the thing that is tough is that you're describing the movement properly (there's an internal spiral of energy), but the anatomical process is different.
the leg is externally rotated, but the situation of hip-and-leg to foot creates this 'internal rotation' or 'counter rotation' or 'spiral' to the leg.
so, i said "well, yes" even though from the anatomical perspective, that's not exact--i find that your description of it is correct. |
|
| |
|
Location: London, England | Hi Om,
It's ok, I spend most of my time confused, so we can form a club I think perhaps you are getting a bit mixed up-when we talk about hip roation, we are referring to the hip joint itself-in anatomy, this is the hip-to the layperson, the hip is the two 'innominate' bones that comprise the pelvis, so hip rotation implies movment of the pelvis, rather than of the hip joint-does that make sense?
When you say forward bends, which ones? otherwise I can't fathom out what you mean by 'sit bones vertical.'
I was in a class today talking about sitting forward bends-one of the problems for SI patients is that when they sit down, the hips are in flexion-so the gluteals and external rotators of the hip joints are stretched, and therefore inhibited-the inhibition of these muscles increases as you attempt to bend forwards. As these muscles are often used to protect the SI joint, and also to transmit the forces created by our posture and movment through the body, you can see that perhaps this means that a yoga posture, for example, may mean that the forces that are created by what you do may have an undesirable impact on the SI joint.
So I think what we should do when we sit down is to attempt to use the bandha to create a posture which closes and shields the SI joints. There are at least 29 muscles each side of the body which, when contracted appropiately, provide what is called 'force closure' of the SI joints, and greater spinal stability-the ability to maintain good posture under adverse conditions-as is exhibited in yoga postures.
Say I'm sitting, preparing to go into pashimottanasana. I'll activate my core, or bandha, and my hip external rotators contract-but because of my change in posture-I'm not standing-these muscle swap their function-they instead pull the sitting bones over the floor towards my feet, and because of their attachment to my sacrum, they squeeze the surfaces of my SI joints together. The better the position of my sacrum, the better the posture feels, so I use what is called kinaesthetic awareness (the ability to sense where our body parts are in space), to align my sacrum so that the muscles can contract.
Those external rotators do something else-as stated above, they attach to the sacrum-their insertion is on the femur. So now, when I go into pashimottanasana, my feet are being pulled towards me, and I am being pulled towards my feet-I would suggest that most people push their feet away from them as they try to straighten their legs-which is a recipe for distaster-we are told not to lift heavy boxes with bad posture, and here we are in a yoga pose, perhaps 'lifting' a considerable weight as we try to extend our knees and pull on our feet-both actions are exactly the same as lifting.
The truth, of course, is far more complex-there's 29 muscles each side, of course, and each one has a part to play-for instance, the hamstrings-they attach to the sit bones, and to the tibia below the knee. When my sitting bones get pulled forwards, they actually scarcely move-what happens is that the are pulled over by the action of bandha-so I get greater hip flexion and the ability to counter-nutate my sacrum, with a corresponding stretch of my hamstrings as the origin of the muscles is pulled away from the insertion. The forces created can be felt to pull the heel of the foot towards the back of the knee, so as an added benefit, I prevent knee hyper-extension (a feature that is often seen in SI pain sufferers).
So that shouyld hopefully mean that not only is my core protecting my low back, but it is also pulling me into the posture-I think that often we are provided with a choice-do we only do postures and protect our low backs, or do we exert ouselves and run the risk of injury. By using bandha, we can practice safely and also with maximum effect-performance and safety are two sides of the same coin.
Nick |
|
| |
|
| nick:
i love the complexity. but it's so hard to give that to a student. and most students aren't interested. i mostly teach by "feel" and try to keep the rotations (actual) out of it.
but, great writing there. maybe you should write an anatomy and biomechanics of yoga book.
|
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 8442
| Om - if you were in my class I would say "Oh my gosh! That is too far. You need to back off enough so that your knee and thigh muscles face the front of the room." The external rotation is one of those areas where an action is called for, not a movement. Your body has an ability to move farther than it reasonably should  |
|
| |
|
Location: London, England | Hi ZB,
Quite true! I was going to say that, but I was feeling a little long-winded Always teach the feeling of good posture, rather than the biomechanical basis-unless you are a teacher and want to teach the correct feel, then you can give a rationale for the'treatment' that is your yoga class.
Nick |
|
| |
|
| Thank you tourist, that's exactly what I've been talking about all along. I didn't realize I was rotating THAT much to begin with. Once it was pointed out to me (and not even with the words "external" nor "rotation"), everything seemed to click into place. I always figured external rotation was external rotation, so the more you go, the deeper you'd be (I guess?). I never thought there could be TOO far a person could go, that's all. In fact, the teacher was so kind, I have to tell you.... she just came over and turned my hip point down a bit, saying "Why don't you try it this way? I'm betting it's going to feel so much better, probably totally different than you've ever felt before." Now THAT was adjusting! And all I've been trying to do since, is understand how to recreate that proper alignment for me (for ME!). Heh, totally a lesson, in all respects, that less truly is more. |
|
| |
|
| Oh and Nick, the forward bend I was referring to was uttanasana. Thought I had mentioned it in my post, sorry. Just reread what you said about paschimottanasana (yes, I read and reread what you write...). The external rotators contract, yes? Would that be accomplishing the same thing as squeezing the hips together around towards the sacrum, in order to keep the sacrum from spreading apart? Kinda like that truss you had mentioned to me a while ago, a belt that squeezes more towards one's back than evenly all around? If so, then that's what I find myself doing manually quite a bit: hands on my hips, fingers facing front, trying to get the thumbs toward each other in the back, literally packing my sacrum back together. Or is that just to take stress off the psoas? Geeze, I really should've quit while I was ahead.... |
|
| |
|
| zoebird - 2007-08-16 10:56 AM i think the thing that is tough is that you're describing the movement properly (there's an internal spiral of energy ), but the anatomical process is different. the leg is externally rotated, but the situation of hip-and-leg to foot creates this 'internal rotation' or 'counter rotation' or 'spiral' to the leg. so, i said "well, yes" even though from the anatomical perspective, that's not exact--i find that your description of it is correct. Just saw this reply, must've missed it earlier, sorry. So OK ZB, thank you! I am confusing spiral with rotation, that makes perfect sense now. I tend to be so aware of energy spirals (as well as those pesky loops) that they are as real to me as anatomical positionings, if not more so. Heh, I'm so glad SOMEONE finally figured out what I was talking about, even if I wasn't so sure about it myself! |
|
| |
|
Location: London, England | Hi Om,
Yes, it's the same as that trochanteric belt-creating the conditions from within.
Nick
Edited by Nick 2007-08-16 2:33 PM
|
|
| |
|
Location: London, England | "Or is that just to take stress off the psoas? Geeze, I really should've quit while I was ahead...."
Hi Om,
Well, theoretically, the psoas would boe a core muscle which would also act in pulling the torso towards the thighs in a forward bend-as well as helping, or hindering, the formation of a good posture of the low back, hips, and pelvis-the muscle acts across these areas. But you are quite right-yes, the external rotators do take stress off the psoas, in that they create a better spinal position so that the psoas can exert its action more effectively, so that you end up achieving more for the same amount of effort-that's why this bandha idea is so good-it creates a knowledge of good posture, whatever the posture.
Nick
|
|
| |
|
Location: London, England | "OK, counter-nutation and pelvis tilting in forward bends -- I think I understand that "close-packed" thing, but not sure. When I would forward bend in class, the teacher would come and try to squeeze my lowback smaller, for the lack of a better term. What it feels like is my sitbones are separating too much and the tailbone is going along with them to point at the ceiling. So now I try to send the sitbones vertical while taking the tailbone to the floor, and I even get a hamstring stretch for a change! But I'm not sure which way my pelvis is tilting when I'm folded and upsidedown like that. Hmm, I'm trying to correct for too much of an anterior tilt, yes? Bony hip points(OK, that's not the ASIS, sorry) are moving too far forward, so that's anterior, got it."
Hi Om,
Well in most forward bends, the more anterior tilt you get, the easier it is to counter-nutate the sacrum-as the brim of the pelvis tilts forwards, so the top (sacral promontery) of the sacrum can move backwards, bringing the joints surfaces into the close-packed position. So you tiliting your sit-bones towards the ceiling, and squeezing your lower back, would help achieve that.
Interesting that you mention the sit-bones spreading-I often use the instruction to pull the sit-bones together in the sitting forward bends. It is the same sort of movement that you would do if you sat on a pin. The buttocks tighten, even though they are in a lengthened state. This is part of the reason for the extra hamstring stretch-the glutes etc are hauling on the sit-bones, the origin of the hamstrings. So well done!
Nick |
|
| |
|
| OK, wanted to come back to this thread a bit, just to post an update. We did parsvakonasana in class again this morning,and when we got to the second side (left leg forward), the instruction I personally received was "more inner spiral in the back leg". Not internal rotation, but inner spiral. So I tried to apply that to my pose, and then she said "stick your butt out behind you more". So I tried to do that as well, without tweaking my SI and compressing the left hip crease, which ended up not creaking on me after all (yay!). Her comment on layering in that instruction? "Better." So I'm still kinda clueless as to what this difficulty I'm having is in this pose. I mean, in other poses, you tend to know what you can't do and why (tight hamstrings, lower back, hips, etc.). But here, I'm not even sure what's keeping me from moving into better alignment, and more importantly, keeping me safe from further injury. It's almost like telling someone to engage their pancreas and then move it to the right. There's just no access to the part(s) that need to be engaged. Though, she did say "better".... |
|
| |
back leg in parsvakonasana
