|
|
| I had read somewhere and have heard from a couple of teachers i've worked with, that it's "shocking to the I had read somewhere that it is "shocking to the sacrum" to bring your knees to chest immediately after a series of backbends. Especially full wheel. I suppose this makes sense, and i can remember taking my knees in after wheel in the past, and it just didn't feel all together right. So instead i'll hang out in Baddha Konasana for a while and THEN perhaps i bring my knees up.
So, yogi's, what is YOUR take on this?
Can someone explain the "shocking to the sacrum" part from an allignment perspective? I get the concept from a sensation standpoint, but would like to understand it a bit more.
Thanks friends.
Nat |
|
| |
|
| By full wheel you mean "hands touching feet"?
8o
Maybe in a different lifetime for me... :D
Edited by ollie 2007-12-05 5:40 PM
|
|
| |
|
| I know "full wheel" to mean urdhva dhanurasana, which I think is pretty standard terminology. I was also taught that after more advanced backbends (as opposed to the baby backbends such as low cobra, makarasana and sphinx), it's good practice to neutralize the spine before going into a forward bend position, such as knees to chest. So yes, coming down from wheel, or even bridge, into supta baddha konasana, or supine with the feet mat-distance apart and knees touching for a few breaths, tends to be very nice on the lowback and sacrum. You've gone pretty extreme in one direction (the backbend), so going in the opposite (forward bend) right away just makes sense that it would be a "shock to the system", if not the sacrum. As for why from the alignment perspective, I'm sure there are others here that will delight in explaining the anatomical details.  For me, sensation is enough in telling me how to practice safely. |
|
| |
|
| OrangeMat - 2007-12-05 3:09 PM
I was also taught that after more advanced backbends (as opposed to the baby backbends such as low cobra, makarasana and sphinx), it's good practice to neutralize the spine before going into a forward bend position, such as knees to chest.
I think that it is pretty standard to avoid any but very gentle forward bends immediately after the deeper backbends. If you rebalance the spine before continuing with forward bends (especially deep forward bends), your body's natural "spring tensions" will reset and you will avoid injury.
Edited by jimg 2007-12-06 12:35 AM
|
|
| |
|
| i don't personally find it "shocking" to my body, but i've been doing yoga for so long, very little is. i can do urdvha dhanurasana completely cold, for example, which most yoga teachers would consider a "shock" to the body without warm up--but then wheel (chakrasana) and full pidgeon (kapotasana, sometimes also called diamond pose) are the back bends that i'm working know (also scopion on forwarms and hands, getting my feet to my head).
so, i'm a bit 'odd' when it comes to my practice. but, my preference is still for a stair-step method, which i also apply in my teaching.
when it comes to my teaching, i go to intermediate steps of lesser back bends before moving to forward bends. this stair-stepping to a deep back bend and then stair-stepping back to a forward bend works best for them.
for example, we're start with knees in chest, then go to supta baddha konasana, and then go to setu bandhasana (setu bandha sarvinghasana), and then into urdvha dhanurasana, and then into chakrasana, back to urdvha dhanurasana, then setu bandhasana, then supta baddha konasana, and then knees into chest (then a series of abdominal movements, and another round of back bends).
the stair-step method is great for those who can go all the way to chakrasana, but it's also great for beginner and tight/tired students. a student can "stop" at any point, and just hold that posture for the duration of the back bending series/time. so, some students will stop at setu bandhasana, and some will stop at urdvha danurasana, and some will return back to the previous back bend or the first one (supta baddha konasana).
it works well for me, at least. |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 8442
    
| The Iyengar answer is to do a series fo twists after backbends and before forward bends. Twists "bring the spine back to a neutral position" is how I have been taught. Back in the day, we did backbend, then forward bend and repeated. somewhere along the line someone found that was not best for the spine. |
|
| |
|
| tourist - 2007-12-06 9:17 AM
'Twists bring the spine back to a neutral position"
My teacher used to say this as well and seems to make the most sense. If anything it just feels good. |
|
| |
|
| Nothing wrong with pose and counterpose.
Hasn't anyone done a sun salute?
There's another version of Chakrasana where you go tick tock and into uttanasana and wheel..
What's the big deal?
|
|
| |
|
| Nobody said anything was WRONG with pose and counterpose, and im sure we all have at least heard of Surya Namaskar. The issue is safe counter-pose and not so safe. After a series of backbends that increase in intensity, it only makes sense to stabalize the low spine a bit before jumping straight into a forward fold or knees to chest. Some of us go right into it and others approach it differently. Personally, through self inquiry and many years of practice i have discovered what works and what doesnt. When to move forward and when to back off.
I was simply asking what others thought. |
|
| |
|
| Personally, through self inquiry and many years of practice i have discovered what works and what doesnt.
of course, this is individual, not categorical. through my self inquiry and many years of practice, i've discovered what works for me, and in my teaching, i offer the space for students to discover what works for them.
for some, the step-up/step-down approach works best, for others, they can handle deep pose/counter pose situations quickly. it really is individual, and can really only be determined through self inquiry and practice.
i think it's good to talk about what others think/experience, but problematic if anyone wants to set it as a particular 'standard' for everyone. not that there shouldn't be some "standards" or what have you for general safety, etc, but some people are capable of things that others are not, and it's good.  KWIM? |
|
| |
|
| Neither the forward or backward bending in the Classical Surya Namaskar are intense enough (on the sacrum) such that it makes a strong case for the OP's OP.
Nathan, the phrase "shocking" usually indicates something at the level of the nervous system. Since the spine serves as a hub for nerve pathways and the sacrum is technically part of the spine, it is the nerve roots traveling through the sacral area that might be in question.
There is a certain integrity to the spine. Sometimes that integrity is referred to as a neutral spine. In a neutral spine the sacrum flows with the spine rather than opposite the spine. Releasing the low back seems to be counter-intuitive. That is that students behave as though rounding the lower back (pulling the knees to the chest) is good. And for some it may initially feel good for a variety of reasons beyond the scope of this post and forum.
However, releasing the low back is counter intuitive. The rounding of the lower back does extend the lumbar spine but it does not appropriately release the musculature that persuades the pelvis out of integrity. Therefore it is important to to be mindful of what we are doing after intense back bending actions.
There are other ways to release the low back which are sensible from an anatomical perspective. Knees into chest simply may not be the best choice in the bigger picture.
Edited by purnayoga 2007-12-07 3:30 PM
|
|
| |
|
| I think vinyasa style is very powerful and allows the fluid body to make these transitions natural and soothing...
Can you do tick tock purna? Your ability to do this would change your opinion.
|
|
| |
What do YOU think?
