If you’ve been to more than a handful of yoga classes, you’ve hopefully heard at least a few Sāṃskṛta (Sanskrit) words sprinkled throughout: tāḍāsana, adho mukha śvānāsana, ujjāyī, śavāsana. Some teachers use them consistently, some rarely, and some not at all.
And because the global yoga world has grown so quickly – often separated from its cultural and philosophical roots – students can understandably wonder:
Do Sāṃskṛta terms matter?
Is it necessary? Respectful? Outdated? Exclusive? Appropriative?
And what about “namaste” at the end of class – is that actually correct?
This post is my attempt to gently, clearly, and respectfully explore why I use Sāṃskṛta in my classes, courses, and materials, how to use it without gatekeeping or gimmick, and why I don’t close my classes with “namaste” (and why I think it’s worth reconsidering if you currently do).
Why Sāṃskṛta Matters in Modern Yoga
yoga has roots – and roots matter
Yoga didn’t begin in the West. It has a long, complex, beautiful history with deep connections to India’s spiritual, linguistic, and philosophical traditions. Using Sāṃskṛta doesn’t make a class “more authentic” in a superficial sense, but it does acknowledge that we are working with a tradition that predates us by thousands of years.
Sāṃskṛta is the language in which much of yoga’s philosophy was articulated:
the Haṭha Yoga Pradīpikā, the Bhagavad Gītā, the Yoga Sūtra of Patañjali.
By using even a little of the same language, we maintain a thread of connection to that lineage.
Sāṃskṛta is precise
One posture may have three (or more!) different English names – forward fold, standing forward bend, rag doll; but uttānāsana is always uttānāsana.
The same goes for prāṇāyāma: “victorious breath” is vague, even “ocean breath” is; ujjāyī prāṇāyāma is exact.
Sāṃskṛta provides clarity and consistency in a global teaching environment.
the language carries energetic intention
Sāṃskṛta is considered a vibrational language; its sounds are thought to influence the subtle bodies (kośa) and mind. Whether or not you take that literally, the rhythm and structure of Sāṃskṛta phrases often embody the very qualities yoga invites: steadiness, spaciousness, attention.
Using Sāṃskṛta Without Exclusion or Performance
One of the most common fears teachers have is that using Sāṃskṛta will feel elitist or inaccessible. My philosophy is simple: use Sāṃskṛta to include rather than exclude.
Here’s how I do that:
- Always pair Sāṃskṛta with English – not everyone recognises virabhadrāsana I, but everyone knows “warrior one”. Saying both helps students learn organically without feeling corrected or overwhelmed.
- Pronounce words respectfully – but don’t fear imperfection – language learners make mistakes, and may have speech impairments (like me). What matters for us all is sincere effort, not flawless phonetics
- Explain the meaning when relevant – generally speaking, students love knowing that supta means “reclining” or that utthita means “extended”. It makes the practice feel less like memorising foreign terms and more like connecting with a rich linguistic system.
- Use it for clarity, not aesthetic – Sāṃskṛta isn’t a branding tool and doesn’t need to be used performatively. If a term enhances clarity or honouring of lineage, use it; if it creates confusion, simplify.
The “Namaste Problem”: Why I Don’t Say It at the End of Class
This is a sensitive topic, and rightfully so; “namaste” has become nearly universal in Western yoga culture – but its use is often misunderstood.
Namaste is a respectful greeting in India, used in conversation the way we might say “hello”, “good morning”, or “thank you”.
It literally means: “I bow to you” (namaḥ = bow, te = to you)
It is not traditionally used as a ceremonial closing phrase for spiritual practices or classes.
When “namaste” was adopted into Western yoga studios, it was often wrapped in meanings it historically doesn’t carry: “I honour the divine in you”; “The light in me honours the light in you”; and so on.
These are poetic sentiments, but they are interpretations, not translations; and using a greeting as a sacred closing phrase has no basis in Indian cultural practice.
For many Indian practitioners and scholars, this misappropriation feels like a flattening of a living language into a spiritual catchphrase; and so ending a class with “namaste” doesn’t match linguistic reality, creates a veneer of spirituality, and can (perhaps unintentionally) contribute to misunderstandings about Indian culture.
If yoga is about truthfulness (satya), clarity, and awareness, it’s reasonable to question habits that don’t align with those values.
To summarise, I don’t use it because:
- It’s culturally inconsistent with how “namaste” is actually used
- It’s not necessary for a respectful or sacred closing
- I want to avoid perpetuating a misunderstanding
- I prefer to end class in a way that feels aligned, clear, and contextually respectful
Instead, I close with:
- A short moment of silence
- Gratitude or reflection
- A spacious breath
- A simple “thank you for practising with me”
This feels honest, grounded, and free from cultural misrepresentation.
So – should you use Sāṃskṛta in your yoga practice?
There’s no single correct answer, but here’s my gentle recommendation:
Use Sāṃskṛta intentionally, respectfully, with context, and use it only insofar as it deepens your understanding and your students’ experience.
We don’t need to mimic ancient India to honour yoga’s roots, and we don’t need to abandon Sāṃskṛta to avoid appropriation. There is a thoughtful middle path where we acknowledge origins, communicate clearly, and practise with integrity.
For me, that looks like using traditional āsana names, teaching with clarity, avoiding performative spirituality, and not ending class with “namaste” – not because it’s wrong in itself, but because it simply isn’t accurate for the context we’re in.
Yoga grows, evolves, and adapts, and as it does, we get to choose which parts of the practice we carry forward with intention, which habits we retire with gratitude, and how we make space for deeper understanding along the way.
