Ok, i wanted to say that i trust and follow my inner guru… 
Then i understand that “opening the chakra” is a broad term, it implicates various aspects related to the activity of the chakra, either pranic or spiritual.
[QUOTE=Techne;20897]he, he, Asuri – lots of yoga folks seem to be idealists. They’ll say the rock you just stubbed your toe on is a mental construct. But more than that, once you start talking about something that exists but two people can’t point at it and say it’s name, materialists (folks who figure if and only if you can stub your toe on ‘it’ then ‘it’ is real) say its just a mental construct. [/QUOTE]
I am a bit of a materialist. If something has objective reality, any two people should be able to agree on its form, color, smell, texture, etc. We all know what we mean when we talk about thoughts or emotions. Even though they aren’t physical, they are common experience. I’m always suspicious when someone tells me he is able to perceive something that I cannot.
The Samkhya philosophy, which is one of the oldest and most influential of Indian philosophies, talks extensively about the subtle body, but doesn’t mention chakras at all. Patanjali’s Yoga Sutras, which some consider a Samkhya document, makes only one or two vague references. So its questionable whether the concept of chakras was really a part of classical yoga. The Upanishads, though, make frequent reference to the chakras. So I think its fair to say that the concept of chakras belongs more to the Vedic religion than to Yoga.
[QUOTE=Hubert;20899]… What you ask for, is actually the evidence of suprasensible, that there is more to the world, than our normal senses are capable to experience. And that is not a little thing to know, if you think of it.
[/QUOTE]
This is true. I’m reminded of a Samkhya aphorism - Just because the blind cannot see, does not mean that others cannot also see. So I will reserve judgement for now.
[quote=oak333;20900]
To think that this kundalini can be easily awakened or roused by accident is another fallacy. Awakening the kundalini force is exceedingly difficult and cannot be done accidentally. It takes years of concerted meditation under the guidance of a competent guru before one can dream of releasing the heavenly astral body from its bondage to physical confinement by awakening the kundalini. One who is able to awaken the kundalini fast approaches the state of Christhood.
Yogananda-The Second Coming of Christ[/quote]
Without context, this demands personal faith in his words, which turns lot of people off, and understandably loses them. I think it’s important to understand here that not all realized yogis are in a position to, or want to, write a book. It’s not what qualifies knowledge in yoga. So although this is “classic,” it is also his own personal style of administering yoga awareness, which is what a teacher does, classic or not, authoring a book or not. This is no disrespect to Yogananda or any classic yogi (although he is not, born 1893, died 1952).
What Yogananda refers to here is full-blown, sushumnal awakening that one continues with deliberate control. No disputing this is not an accident and indeed needs guidance. Yet kundalini is a part of animal nature, as it is a part of our own and operates partially in either ida or pingala as soon as they form in the whom, obviously without awareness. So long as there is no conflict in its alternating freely within the body, it contributes to all bodily functions, locomotion, breath, elimination, etc.
Chakra means “wheel.” They are the pivotal points in the body around which mass and energy revolve to produce these functions. They are “subtle,” and so are their relative motions, but only because they do not correspond precisely to physical anatomy, or to voluntary control, yet they have a “geography,” a structure. They are dynamic and somewhat free-floating within their general regions, until one has the strength and control to bring them into conjunction and keep them there. That’s what you won’t do by accident. That alignment extends to the world outside of us, and is no longer confined within the physical body, not unlike being connected to your mother through the whom.
Ansuri,
What you say here revolves around itself, and is your karma. In your own words you describe here not what you “cannot” perceive, but why you “will not.” Until you can accept the contrary, you have yet to find your true teacher. It’s is a doorway through which you can look forward. I mean no disrespect here, but encourage you to keep looking.
peace, brothers & sisters,
siva
Hmmmm…
Chakra means “wheel.” They are the pivotal points in the body around which mass and energy revolve to produce these functions.
It seems like you are saying that the chakra is not the whole wheel, but the hub, and that mass and energy constitute the rest of the wheel, and revolving around the hub, they produce bodily functions? Hmmm…
They are “subtle,” and so are their relative motions, but only because they do not correspond precisely to physical anatomy, or to voluntary control, yet they have a “geography,” a structure.
So you’re saying that chakras don’t correspond exactly to physical anatomy, but you just said they were involved in producing bodily functions. You’re saying that the chakras move relative to each other? Is this an up and down or side to side motion or what?
They are dynamic and somewhat free-floating within their general regions, until one has the strength and control to bring them into conjunction and keep them there.
But didn’t you say that they do not correspond to physical anatomy or voluntary control? If we cannot control them voluntarily, how can we bring them into “conjunction”? What do you mean by “conjunction”?
That’s what you won’t do by accident. That alignment extends to the world outside of us, and is no longer confined within the physical body, not unlike being connected to your mother through the whom.
So are you disputing Yogananda’s method and saying that the correct method is to bring the chakras into alignment? But you’re saying that the alignment extends into the outside world, where Yogananda is talking about the spiritual world. Personally I’ve had some success using Yogananda’s method, i.e. pratyahara.
[QUOTE=siva;20937]Without context, this demands personal faith in his words, which turns lot of people off, and understandably loses them. I think it’s important to understand here that not all realized yogis are in a position to, or want to, write a book. It’s not what qualifies knowledge in yoga. So although this is “classic,” it is also his own personal style of administering yoga awareness, which is what a teacher does, classic or not, authoring a book or not. This is no disrespect to Yogananda or any classic yogi (although he is not, born 1893, died 1952).
What Yogananda refers to here is full-blown, sushumnal awakening that one continues with deliberate control. No disputing this is not an accident and indeed needs guidance. Yet kundalini is a part of animal nature, as it is a part of our own and operates partially in either ida or pingala as soon as they form in the whom, obviously without awareness. So long as there is no conflict in its alternating freely within the body, it contributes to all bodily functions, locomotion, breath, elimination, etc.
peace, brothers & sisters,
siva[/QUOTE]
I agree with you that there are realized yogis who do not write books. However, that does NOT mean that they disagree with Yogananda.
IMHO Yogananda has a lot of authority and credibility, as the lineage of his girus goes Sri Yuktesvar-Lahirii Mahasaya-Babaji. You are well qualified and you know it. To me to have this lineage of gurus counts a lot. I just believe him.
I also agree with you that Yogananda probably meant total, sushumnal Kundalini awakening. There are other phenomena like electric shocks, tingling in the spine, etc, met sometimes during the practice. However, they are only signs that Kundalini is starting to awake, not that Kundalini has totally awakened. Such phenomena are described eg by Vivekananda.
Siddhiyoga on this forum explained that sometimes Kundalini might be activated by trauma. I agree wuth him.
I will quote one recent example: a relative of mine described how in her church there was coming an old lady with lots of difficulties in life. At times, she was starting to shake that violently that even the windows if the church started to shake. What else could have been than Kundalini activated by trauma ?
One more question, Siva. Of what material are these pivotal points made? Or are you saying that they are simply a location in time and space?
It is hard to make abstraction of our education about the human body. After all, materialist science and it’s hypostesis permeated our world to the degree, that certain things we find unquestionable facts. For this science, the world of the senses is the only world outthere, to the level, that research what is not biased towards a materialist approach is strongly discouraged, and anything what points to the suprasensible is omitted.
I for long wanted to have an in depth analysis of the so called “scientific method” on this forum, to prove that it is not free at all from subjectivity, and also it is strongly affected by existing theories. Today, only that research is seen as scientific what extends the rule of the main existing theories - our science is specialized and more and more lost into details.
Given this enviromnent, every sound thinking person who has some education, accepts the scientific world view, even if one does not really know it, it accepts it because this is what rules the media, too. And to give them credit, rightly so, because what has passed down as an exernal religious form is inaccesible to a mind yearning for comprehension. The revival of yoga is explained by this, because it apparently provides a reasonable approach, insted of blind fate based on the authority of religious tradition. Yoga being practicable without beleiveing in some dogma, draws many through the accesibility of asana practice. After all, we all have bodies, and we can move our limbs freely. Thus, our own development is literraly put into our hands, instead of relying on blind fate.
It is where we are, and it is the best starting point. The confusion about chakras is understandable. It is clear that these are not physical organs … they are not there if you cut open a human being. Sure there is the spine, and nervous tissue, the solar plexus, the brain, but you will never find physical constructions similar to the number of petals described in the Upanishads, to give an example. Thus, if one has a strong scientific education, it is hard to even accept the existence of chakras - the superficial thinker will identify them with various glands, or nervous hubs, but in reality, based on the anatomy of the physical body, chakras are non-existant.
Thus, we go back to the question if we are able to accept the idea of a spiritual, non-material part of the human being, or not. One needs to know the current scientific theories and world view well enough to realize how many assumptions they use, and to even realize that the main theories are not really proven, but hypotesis what are not in contradiction with the experiements. What this means, that from a materialist point of view they are likely, but on a deeper analysis, they cannot be called facts.
Huge intellectual efforts are put into these theories, so naturally, if one questions them, one needs to be prepared for a similar performance.
To give an example, biology, what is not that old of a science, assumes that the living cell is a mechanism, ruled by the DNS, and the complex actions of organic molecules, and even assumes that if we are able to descipher the rules by the DNS and these molecules operate, we will be able to create “living cells”. This is not my fancy, read this article and the following discussion … to have a glimpse of what our science is today, how biologists think. It is called [I][FONT=Verdana]Fundamental complexity, Measures of Life.[/I][/FONT]
What I beleive, is that Life is suprasensorial. Sceince does not know what life is, if it knew, it could create living beings, yet, it cannot. What it can is to mingle with it, and change it’s course … but it can’t create even the most basic thing we’d call alive, a small bacteria. Yes, we can alter the DNS, and change how the bacteria or virus acts, appears, and we think we created something new, but that is not creation of life, it is altering existing life.
If one really meditates on a dead body of a human being, or an animal, or a plant, something alive, one has to admit this: This body lies in front of me, and it is ruled by the various chemical, and physical forces of it’s constituents. It is made of physical substances, and the the laws of chemistry and physics apply to it. What happens to it ? It decays, rots, falls apart, until it is but a dust of minerals. If we think of these forces, these very laws what make the physical body decay, we must assume that they also apply to the living being, too. It would be silly to think that these laws are not applicable to the physical body of the living beings. Than how come that during life, we do not decay, and fall apart ? And we must assume the existence of something, what prevents and opposes the very action of the laws what apply to dead matter.
Ansuri, now you’re talking,
I’m saying the hub is the whole wheel. The mass is yours, your weight, and the energy is its force + direction. And it doesn’t revolve continuously, but alternately one way, and then back the other.
Yes. Just your weight on your frame and your movement exerts pressure and force on the organs and muscles etc., that drive function. Just as its balance and alignment dictate somewhat, the health of those functions.
Yes. They are centers of balance, They are not fixed. They are dynamic and move within a confined, yet general area. They alternately rotate and counter-rotate to convert linear and rotational movement into wave form, not unlike a snake, beginning with the hip sockets and the mula. That’s where you must first gain control in order to gain the rest.
Here I mean “voluntary muscle control.” You bring them into “conjunction,” or alignment, through a sequential process of letting go and holding on, largely coordinated with control of your breath.
I’m not disputing Yogananda’s anything, only that what he says needs translation. Kundalini can be and must be understood in more practical terms. And you can call it a spiritual world if you want, because it is, but what I meant is, when the shit came together for me, my sense of inner and outer disappeared, like there’s no longer a boundary between myself and the outer world. I felt so immense and heavy, like I extended out to the horizon, like I might be producing my own gravitational field. You know? Like capture a moon or two. That’s what i call astral.
But in the end, what does that mean? NOTHING! I still have responsibilities. I still have to go to work and pay my bills. I didn’t come to know everything, but what I do know now is “one,” and that is the light, I believe, “cast onto the boundlessness of eternity to reveal the universal Spirit,” that Yogananda is referring to.
all excellent questions,
thank you,
peace,
siva
[QUOTE=Asuri;20932]I am a bit of a materialist. .[/QUOTE]
Let us try materialism.
The energy consumption of a human being is 4 KJ per Kg of body mass per hour.
http://www.bwl.admin.ch/themen/00509/00528/index.html?lang=en
For a man of 75 Kg this amounts to
4 KJ/Kg Hr x 75 Kg x 24 Hrs = 7,200 KJ
http://www.convert-me.com/en/convert/energy
which amounts to over one million calories. A man 75 Kg takes cca 3,000
calories per day from food.
From where does the remainder come ?
Note: Have some fun with it. I do not pretend to demonstrate the existence
of Chakras by thermodynamics.
Chiva,
You did a good job of trying to answer my questions, but without getting into details, I think your theory has some holes in it. Do you have some authoritative source for this teaching, or did you figure this out yourself?
Oak,
Man does not live by bread alone, but should always check his math.
I’m a materialist in the sense that I buy into the notion of duality, that the material world is real, and that it cannot arise from a source that is not material in nature.
Getting back to the original question, the awakening of Kundalini and chakra opening or activating seem to be related. The methods of awakening the kundalini are fairly well known and understood. The process of “opening” or "activating the chakras is not as clear.
According to the Yoga Kundalini Upanishad, Kundalini awakening happens first. Then Kundalini “pierces” the chakras. The upanishads are fairly consistent in giving the locations of the chakras in the body, but they don’t explain what the chakras represent or elaborate any further on the process of “piercing”. Or if they do, I haven’t found it. So the whole subject is open to interpretation based on your understanding and experience of Kundalini and of the chakras.
[quote=Asuri;20994]Oak,
Man does not live by bread alone, but should always check his math.
I’m a materialist in the sense that I buy into the notion of duality, that the material world is real, and that it cannot arise from a source that is not material in nature.[/quote]
I don’t see any duality here. Duality would be if you’d assume the spiritual and material realities as separate ones.
So where is the separation line between the spiritual and the material ?
Quantum physics, in order to describe the experimental behaviour of subatomic particles, needs to asume the existence of a virtual space, where “phantoms” of subatomic particles move with speed greater than that of light, as some kind of scouts for the real particle to determinate how it should behave. It is silly if you think of it, result of a thinking what dares only to atttribute the same mechanisms of behaviour what we witness on our human scale. But let’s assume it’s true. Then how can these “phantoms” belong to our sensorial world ? Isn’t it true that something what moves with greater speed than light, is suprasensorial ? We see because of the light. What has greater speed than light, we cannot expereince. It is suprasensorial. Not to mention that according to the theory of relativity, there can be no greater speed than that of light. But this is just one aspect. The reason why quantum physiscist needs to create such theories has it’s root in the incapacity to allow the right for matter to be a bearer of consciousness. Consciousenss belongs to the spirit.
Mathematics also belongs to spirituality. For example, the idea of the circle, or other geomethric shapes, their realations, they have nothing material. They are abstractions, yet we recognize them as true. But show me a material circle ! There exists none. There are only close approximations. No matter is fine enough to perfectly shape a circle … it will always be an approximation. Just create one, than look it up with a magnifying glas, or a microscope, and see it’s rough edges.
But you say, the idea of circle is not real, because it is just in my mind. Well, exactly that part of your mind what is capable of having the idea of a circle, is spiritual. The idea of a circle belongs to the spiritual world. And if you think of it, while circles made of matter will eventually perish, the idea of it, is unperishable, timless, eternal. It will not change. Thus mathematics is the most spiritual science, through it’s abstraction. Would you call it non-existant ?
And what makes mathematics what it is ? The presence of consciousness, the spirit in us. Without the mathematician, there is no mathematics.
People have many views but often they just cannot pass the limits of their sensorial conditioning. When someone talks about the spiritual, they imagine it the only way they are able, by having thoughts they used to have about the sensorial world. Exactly their spiritual nature revolts against such follies, because the idea of the bearded God is a follie, in the absolute sense. So, they are right that God if he exists is not Charlton Heston sitting on a cloud, but they are wrong is their conclusions about the existence of the spirit. If you do not see it with your eyes, it does not mean it doesn’t exist. It just means that you have to approach it with something suitable.
Mathematical thinking is very good way to grow accostumed to the spirit. Do not forget, Plato, Aristotle, Pythagoras, they were into spirituality. In fact, anyone who had a significant contribution to humanities evolution, was into some form of spirituality. Newton was into alchemy, what is now being rediscovered by pshychologists as a descriptive language of the psyche, Einsten was reading the Bhagavad Gita, and a believer in God.
Just think of Copernicus. Today we all “know” that the Earth circles the Sun. But what is our actual sensorial expereince ? That the Sun circles the Earth. He was almost burned for stating something what was apparently totally wrong. Now, we know better, and in time, this will be the case with spiritual truths, too.
Life Force
Chakras are wheels for the life force.
What the life force can do you can see an example from a heart which cured itself.
[QUOTE=Hubert;21005]
So where is the separation line between the spiritual and the material ?
Quantum physics, in order to describe the experimental behaviour of subatomic particles[/QUOTE]
I will go a little further along your line of thinking.
In quantum mechanics it is known the DUAL aspect of particles (electrons, neutrons etc): they are BOTH matter and vibration (waves).
The position of particles is described by the equation of Schrodinger:
there is only a PROBABILITY to find a certain particle in a certain position at a certain time.
[QUOTE=Asuri;20994]Oak,
Man does not live by bread alone, but should always check his math.
.[/QUOTE]
The math looks OK to me.
Hello Hubert:
But a materialist would say: “the idea of a circle is contained in your braincell network, and when they die the same will happen to the idea…”
Of course, that idea can colonize other media, paper, hard disks, etc… But all are subject to perish.
What could you reply to him?
[quote=Asuri;20986]Chiva,
You did a good job of trying to answer my questions, but without getting into details, I think your theory has some holes in it. Do you have some authoritative source for this teaching, or did you figure this out yourself?[/quote]
Asuri,
Thank you. Those holes have your name on them, and you will fill them someday on your own.
In all sincerity, do you need a higher authority to accept your learning for you, to approve it for you? Whom might that be? Whom will you accept, Asuri? Someone in a long robe I assume? A long bearded fellow on a pillow maybe?
That dawn you awaken you are completely alone in your acceptance. There is no one there to confirm it for you. Then what will you do?
peace & love,
siva