Hi Sam,

In the context of how they're traditionally taught, I think the yamas & niyamas are precepts just as much as the 10 commandments. Everyone has a choice as to how they choose to follow them.

I don't disagree with you that there can be great benefits from following these precepts, but I think you need to draw the line between what can be called science (remember the scientific method?) and what is more like ancient wisdom. Otherwise, you end up sounding like those people who argue that intellegent design is just as scientific as the theory of evolution.

<< Well the fact that people gather around a guru/yoga teacher does not mean that in order for one to do yoga, and have it work they must buy into a path.>>

Everyone has the choice to engage at whatever level they chose to with all religions. This does not change the fact that they're religions. I can attend a midnight mass if I want to celebrate Christmas that way or recite prayers with friends at a Seder if I believe there's some value in that and I can still remain pretty ambivilant in my beliefs & practices about Catholicism or Judeaism. This doesn't mean that they're not religions.

I think what we have here is an answer to a different question, namely: "If you 'do yoga', does that mean you have to adopt yoga as your religion, the same way one becomes 'born again' or converts to some other faith?" Of course, the answer is no. But, the fact that you can choose your level of engagement with yoga doesn't mean that it isn't a religion. It's just very different from most religions that we're familiar with.

Whatever meaning you want to attribute to the word 'namaste', I think it definitely can come off as "holier than thou" to a lot of people when overused outside of a yoga class. I don't think there's any bhakti yoga in making sure people know you're more spiritual than them. The bhakti yogi is striving for selflessness in his/her devotion to others.

I hope my playing devil's advocate here doesn't give anyone the wrong impression. I have no arguement with any of the good things anyone has said about yoga. I just think a lot of people aren't really being completely honest with themselves around this question because thinking of yoga as a religion would somehow automatically make it bad since all religions are bad.

Look at this definition of religion from Merriam Webster on-line. ( www.m-w.com/dictionary/religion ). I think most of what's there applies to yoga.

Benjamin,

The yamas and niyamas are not dogma. Patanjali (and all other yogis) do not say that you will burn in hell if you don't follow them. They are presented and interpreted in shades of grey, and not in the dogmatic black and white of the 10 commandments. Just look at the words: "commandments" vs. yama/niyama "restraint or moral observances". Can you see the difference between "Thy shall not kill" and "Ahisma / Non-violence"? One is very specific and the second is pretty general. The 10 commandments are considered the word and will of god, while Patanjali was just some cool guy who put the 8 Limbs down on paper. See the difference?

And Patanjali was talking exclusively about Raja Yoga; when you look at the other yogic paths of Bhakti, Jnana, Karma, Tantra and Hatha there is no mention of the yamas and niyamas in their classic texts or practices. Each Yoga has its own set of "limbs" that provides a guide for spiritual practice. All Christians, whether they are a Catholic or a Methodist, absolutely believe in the 10 commandments; you cannot say you are a Christian without this belief. You do not see this at all in the world of yoga, because the yamas and niyamas are a spiritual practice, not a religious belief.

Benjamin, there is a clear difference between religion and spirituality. This difference has nothing to do with believing "all religions are bad," because I don't. Let me give you a very clear example: Prayer is a spiritual practice, not a religion. You can pray to anybody or anything using the technique of prayer. It is not a religion by itself. Yet prayer is used by different religions in different ways and there are specific prayers that are indeed religious because of their content.

And Namaste actually does mean "I honor the Divine within you" and not "I am way more spiritual than you." And it's kind of funny how you used "spiritual" in that sentence rather than "religious". Hmmm.

Namaste,
Timothy

hi friends,
entertaining discussion.

i found it interesting that in the banter about Yamas and Niyamas, no one mentioned Isvara Pranidhana.
Devotion to God is the general translation.
Kind of tricky to teach the Yamas and Niyamas without talking about God.
And even the translation of Yoga as Union is often translated as Union with God.
So, what is the concept of God in the context of Yoga? this may help our friend in the midwest.
I'm really careful when i teach to make my classes accessible to folks of all religions including atheists.
I'm also really dedicated to including philosophy.
So, then along comes Isvara Pranidhana.
What to do?
I usually give a little talk about inserting your own understanding and word for God- Jah, Ma, Allah, Buddha, Jesus, Nature, Energy, INSERT WORD HERE, and have devotion to that. If you ask Yoga for answers about what is Isvara, you will get answers from the Indian traditions, including yes Brahman the formless void and also the trinity of Brahma Vishnu and Shiva and the whole array of Hindu mythology... which can all be taken literally and you can go do puja or you can also interpret everything philosophically. i like both m'self.

In the Yamas and Niyamas then we still have this issue, devotion to Isvara. how do you solve that?
Thankfully Patanjali himself gave a lot of definitions of what is Isvara.... and what is devotion to Isvara as a practice. Aum is Isvara, he says, and chanting Aum with that consciousness is Isvara Pranidhana. Great. He gives other definitions too, but that one usually sets my students at ease. Helps them to see that there really is some flexibility here...

If you do go to yoga looking for religion tho, you can get plenty of answers also.
Isvara is a Sanskrit word for God, but one that my own teacher Swami Dayananda leaves untranslated usually because people in the west have been taught this idea of God as a man in the sky, in heaven, who has this address in heaven and therefore is not in other places, and that is not the concept of God he is interested in sharing and so he uses a different word Isvara to keep that clear, to start new. And then being a non-dualist goes through a whole teaching about Cittanandarupa Shivoham Shivoham, the oneness of the consciousness with Isvara. Yet no one has to ask him, to be on the yogic path following the Yamas and Niyamas. They can look at the Isvara Pranidhana and say oh! okay! I pray to Jesus and Mary! Check! and move on. or they can say oh! well I believe in the formless void and so i practice devotion to that by emptying my mind! check!

you can therefore be a fully practicing yogi of any which religion you want or none at all.

controversial mixing of terms here, but yoga is a science of religions. you can take your pick. the point of the yamas and niyamas is to consider them, ie. one need not take ahimsa to mean not killing mosquitos during a westnile outbreak, it means choosing the path of least harm. similarly one must consider what devotion to Isvara means to you. maybe it means you pick a religion. maybe it means you decide you are god and you'll devote yourself to loving yourself up. fun.

The Latin root word of religion means the same as sanskrit word yoga - - to reunite(to the source). In sanskrit the image of yoke that binds one to the source, in Latin with an image of a ligament binding muscle to bone. Over time, as with all things, change happens. Guess the question comes down to is one's own definition/understanding of each. All perspectives are only ideas, all valid from the a dualistic point of view and all nonsense from a non-dual view.