
Its pretty well known that Sri Krisna Pattabhi Jois, the guruji of ashtanga yoga believes that asana practice is fundamental to the 'higher' practices of yoga - pranayama, pratyahara etc and that as a result of that he doesn't teach his students anything beyond asana until they have achieved proficiency in yoga chikitsa (the primary series) , nadi shodana (the intermediate series) and some of sthira bhaga (the four advanced series). He believes that the asana practice is necessary for the body to withstand the influx of prana that comes with pranayama.
Most authorities on yoga agree that asana is a precursor to pranayama and that it is the foundation of preparing the body for 'real' yoga, however they don't tend to be as dogmatic as Guruji. In most forms of hatha yoga, for instance, pranayama and meditation are taught alongside asana. In India, the majority of yoga practitioners don't do asana at all after they reach adulthood. Their yoga practice is pranayama, karma yoga, bhakti and so on....
OK.
Enough rambling.... time to get to the point.
By sticking to ashtanga and the precept of "practice, practice and all is coming", am I missing out on some of the other stuff that's so integral to yoga?
If, for example, I were to take a jivamukti class alongside my ashtanga practice would I be selling out? I'd get to study yoga philosophy, do kirtan and other forms of bhakti, pranayama, meditation, go to satsang.....
Tempting isn't it....
