In the dialectic between various methods and traditions of yoga - as it often happens in contexts where passion is great - fierce debates have often arisen and comparisons between various proposals of embodied practice and method. There is also written evidence of disputes and confrontations between various lineages, both in texts in Sanskrit and vernacular languages. One among all, the merciless comment on Patanjiali's Yoga Sustra by Svatmarama: “[…] Patanjiali's Yoga Sutras is useless […]”.

Therefore, it is not surprising that in recent times, the teachings of Modern Yoga's Gurus have been often criticized by opposing methods. And B.K.S. Iyengar's is no exception since they have been criticized for being too rigid and assertive on pupils. The instructions were interpreted as binding on students and the props seen as a kind of constraint imposed on the body.

However, on closer inspection, we find the exact opposite is true: Yoga is an open architecture. Let's see why.

The first prop in the practice of Yog-asanas, and also in Iyengar Yoga, is the body. Through the different shapes that we guide our bodies to take, "deforming it" with respect to its "normality", we experience different conditions and predispositions not only musculoskeletal and organic, but also emotional, mental and cognitive. For example, when we extend foreward (think Pascimottanasana) we induce conditions favorable to slow forward, to a systemic or sympathetic quieting and therefore to relaxation; When we flex backwards without support (think Urdhva Dhanurasana) we extend the abdomen, open the chest and induce conditions favorable to an activation of the orthosympathetic nervous system and a cognitive acumen; when we flex backwards with support (think Viparita dandasana with support), we support the heart area and lungs, we enable the diaphragm to extend and soften, and so on. When we twist our spine we not only massage the abdominal organs but tone the kidneys, mobilize the back area, and induce a state of mental balance. The examples could go on and on. Each asana, as Prashant Iyengar uses to repeat, affects the body-breath-mind system in a different way (body-mind-breath) and generates specific and differential physiological, organic and cognitive processes.

The first prop in the practice of Yog-asanas, and also in Iyengar Yoga, is the body. Through the different shapes that we guide our bodies to take, "deforming it" with respect to its "normality", we experience different conditions and predispositions not only musculoskeletal and organic, but also emotional, mental and cognitive. For example, when we flex in (think Pascimottanasana) we induce conditions favorable to slowing down, quieting the autonomus nervous system and, therefore, we train ourselves to relaxation. When we extend back without support (think of Urdhva Dhanurasana) we extend the abdomen, open the chest and induce conditions favorable to an activation of the orthosympathetic nervous system and to a cognitive acumen. When we do supine positions with support (think of passive Viparita dandasana on a chair or bench), we spread the heart area and lungs, enabling the diaphragm to extend and soften, and so on. When we twist our spine we are not only massaging the abdominal organs but also toning the kidneys, mobilizing the back area, and inducing a state of mental balance. The examples could go on and on.

Each asana, as Prashant Iyengar uses to repeat, affects the body-breath-mind system in a different way (body-mind-breath) and generates specific and differential physiological, organic and cognitive processes.

Now, the introduction into the practice of additional props to the body, of which Iyengar was undoubtedly a pioneer and innovator but which is already found in very previous ascetic practices (think of some tapassyas, forms of tapas, which involved the use of ropes and other "aids" to be able to hold the pose for days, or the beautiful cyclopean statue of Narasimha at the archaeological site of Hampi, Karnataka, where the use of belts to stabilize the sitting position is witnessed) has expanded the range of possibilities to experiment with different body-mind-breath processes and patterns.

For example, if in the performance of Salamba Sarvangasana one supports the shoulders with folded blankets, she/he accesses a different body-mind-breath system than when she/he practices the same position with bolsters or bricks. If in Trikonasana one has the back foot against the wall, she/he accesses a different body-mind-breath system than when she/he practices the same asana with the front foot against the wall. Here, too, the examples could go on and on.

This interpretation takes us faraway from the idea of a rigid and binding teaching system and even more from the critique of dogmatism. The prop is not a constraint but it is meant to be of "help" for the student, above all it greatly expands the possibility of exploring different body-mind-breath conditions.

As Prashant Iyengar explained at the last Yoganusanam, through the myriad of variants proposed, the student learns different processes, or how each variant affects the body-breath-mind in a different way: "[...] It is important to inculcate different processes in the students because life confronts us with continuous variations and unexpected and unpredictable situations. We must have an open mind. Yoga is an open architecture and it is not a culture of doing. The culture of doing triggers a culture of the ego. […] Whatever is taught in class should not be taken as a dogma. The key is learning through different processes and experimenting.