The Yoga community sometimes refers to back-extension postures (such as the attached image of wheel/gymnastics bridge) as heart openers. This image of “heart-opening” implies an increase in compassion, a word we might attach moral value of goodness too. But is compassion synonymous with goodness?
Compassion might be broken down into two words com (with) and passion (suffering). Having been moralistic and virtuous at various points in life, I have at times seen this as the ultimate goal of being; To suffer with. Having also known many passionate and suffering creatures (myself included) I am aware of the troubles of being led exclusively by the heart. This does not imply that being led by the head is a “better” choice. Valuing a hierarchy of cold rationality and utilitarianism over blind passion is not a suitable exchange for the chaos that may result from rationalizing a felt desire.
Now is not a time that my backbend is at its most expressive. My practice has turned toward the practical and the protective. This was a rational path guided by the circumstances presented; Serving to keep my body strong, resilient and “fit.”
Most public expressions of my practice have also leaned farther into this side of the polarity; But a purely rational approach lacks meaning.
A capable vessel that lacks desire, can be host to an imperceptible and slow progressing cancer. Any philosophy that poses an either/or solution embraces a “flat earth” up/down left/right false dichotomy onto our physio/psych/spiritual holistic cosmology. The “goal” of any polarity is to equilibrate, to produce a third: A metaphorical “child” that is of the two and yet transcends them.
The spine that prefers extension may be pulled by future (progressive) impulse, and that which gravitates toward flexion tends to be stuck conserving the past; But the spine that only moves in two directions has forgotten it’s spherical nature, it’s aliveness. We that exist in this or that paradigms are dead spiritually if not yet physically.