Talk:Kundalini yoga

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 2 October 2018 and 18 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Cheri Morgan.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 01:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Please discuss changes here first...

This is an topic article where opinions and the level of knowledge vary. As a co-editor of this page, I have striven to include and support statements made here from a wide variety of printed sources written in English, and use recent historical evidence about the teaching of Kundalini Yoga as it is currently recognized by Western Audiences. Due to a variety of roots of teachings and information, and sources which use the same name to describe different things, information can vary. Additionally, some people, groups and religions may have strong POVs around this topic.

Please follow the good faith tenets of Wikipedia and post and discuss changes here first so that if additions are helpful and appropriate, we can continue to co-craft and make this article better.

Just to establish a baseline: This is an article about "Kundalini Yoga", and not necessarily a page about kundalini energy, religion, esoteric forms of kundalini rising, and not necessarily about personal spiritual experiences.

We are always looking for good, cohesive editorial input. If you wish to improve the framework of this page, please do so, but please be prepared to discuss changes before posting. Please back up your sources, as well as provide reasoning for requesting new sections or excluding existing sections. Thank you kindly. RogerThatOne72 (talk) 21:59, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Yogi Bhajan references belong in this page

As a PhD student who has been studying yoga for the past half year, particularly Kundalini Yoga as it is currently practiced in the United States, I feel that the attempts to remove Yogi Bhajan from this page must be motivated by something other than a concern for factual accuracy. Furthermore, accusations that 3HO is a "cult" or anything to that effect are simply groundless, if not slanderous, and completely inconsistent with my experience with the wonderful people involved with that organization.

However one might feel about him, Yogi Bhajan was pivotal for the popularization of Kundalini Yoga in the United States and throughout the world, and has left an indelible mark on how it is currently practiced. According to Yoga Journal, 3HO, the organization started by Yogi Bhajan and which continues his work, Currently oversees 300 Kundalini Yoga centers worldwide: http://www.yogajournal.com/basics/1336

Therefore, excluding Yogi Bhajan from the page simply distorts its accuracy, and removing any explanation of Yogi Bhajan's significance to the contemporary practice of Kundalini Yogi only distorts it further. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Affinity909 (talk • contribs) 00:55, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Question: How can edits be adjusted to improve article without continuing harassment from Wikipedia users such as Gatoclass? Main gripe seems to be that some paragraphs appear as "self-promotional", but he won't clarify or elucidate, and is not willing to work to reach consensus with current authors despite numerous attempts. Therefore it is up to current authors to make improvement in lieu of constructive aid from other Wikipedia users.RogerThatOne72 (talk) 00:23, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

You've been responded to multiple times on this and you were almost banned when you were editing as Fatehji (which was confirmed by Checkuser), but you conveniently stopped using that account and started using this. You are the one that's being disruptive here by refusing to listen to any feedback. I'm sorry, but it's beyond the point where anyone else can keep explaining to you. —SpacemanSpiff 02:51, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Spiff, I used Fatehji at a work terminal when I didn't recall my Roger password a very long time ago, which I have already explained previously – and I never it used again. At that time I was not even aware of what "spoofing" was. What you are doing is clearly using this past mistake as some kind of leverage to hammer in a complete deletion of Yogi Bhajan from this article, and ignore all of the gathered consensus. It's a very poor excuse to use to avoid dialogue about the changes - a very cheap and easy escape - and you know it, so get over it. I'm not interested in arguing about it. This article is clearly not complete without Yogi Bhajan mentioned in it, and there is consensus from various authors, besides myself. I would like to work towards improving it and writing it, so use your common sense instead of your emotions, and stop deleting it completely without cause or discussion.RogerThatOne72 (talk) 12:28, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

New edits created to make the Yogi Bhajan paragraph less "marketing"-driven in tone. Assistance on specific adjustments welcome to be discussed here. See the edits page for the changes.RogerThatOne72 (talk) 15:07, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

This is getting incredibly ridiculous. You have been socking and using Wikipedia for blatant POV pushing and spamming. This has to stop. —SpacemanSpiff 18:16, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

That's total BS. What's ridiculous is your inability to edit, compromise or even discuss changes. I've made hundreds of revisions and edits to this page, and all you and your cohorts and collaborators have ever done is A) never *once* discuss changes, B) never once try to compromise or follow consensus guidelines, and C) knee-jerk auto-delete any mention of Yogi Bhajan from this page. WTF, and SHAME on you. You are not following guidelines at all, and warring. BS. RogerThatOne72 (talk) 04:23, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Hey Spaceman, you can't just keep undoing the page and say "more spamming". that's an intentional mischaracterization of editing work I'm trying to do. It obviously shows you have not read the changes, nor do you have any interest in working towards a working version. How long will you keep ignoring the facts and just deleting changes? Your continuing actions and refusal to work towards a working compromise make your entire purpose and all of your actions highly suspect.RogerThatOne72 (talk) 17:56, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Fatehji, we've had enough of your incessant POV pushing using multiple socks. Stop. —SpacemanSpiff 09:01, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Various Kundalinis

What's not so clear in the article is that Kundalini yoga (or is it "Yoga" with a capital Y?) can mean several different things, including:

• The Upanishad of that name
• Any (and—according to the article in its current iteration—every) yoga practice that taps into kundalini energy
• The Kundalini yoga (with a "y"?) as described by Sivananda Saraswati in the 1930s
• The Kundalini Yoga (with a "Y"?) as described by Yogi Bhajan in the 1960s and is popular in the west today

Because when someone talks about "Kundalini yoga" they might be refering to one, some, all or none of these things, this article needs to reflect that. Morganfitzp (talk) 02:48, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Morgan. One of the first and only people to raise a legitimate discussion on this page. (whew!). How c

Can we go about making this clearer? I agree it would help to clarify it this page somehow, although I think this page is about the yoga. Also, the Kundalini yoga (Sivananda) and Kundalini Yoga (Yogi Bhajan) are very close, and at least have the same root. Yogi Bhajan's expansion of it is much more widespread and accepted in the West, which historically, is more significant, I'd suppose. I'm not sure exactly what others think is marketing about that. Perhaps you can help with the jerks who auto-delete any mention of him. RogerThatOne72 (talk) 04:29 & 05:01, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

BTW, thanks for your edits. No one else has been willing to go into the actual text, read it, or offer intelligent edits for along time... I'd be happy to take specific advice and work with you to make this page better. RogerThatOne72 (talk) 05:01, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

I think it is significant that the Upanishad is called "Yoga-Kundalini Upanishad", not "Kundalini-Yoga Upanishad". This title seems to suggest "this is the Yoga Upanishad called 'Kundalini'", not "an Upanishad on [the school of] Kundalini-Yoga". I have so far failed to find the term "Kundalini-Yoga" in any Sanskrit text (but I am just doing online searches, I am sure it exists somewhere). The texts usually cited as early references for the concept seem to use kundali, not kundalini, and they are Tantra texts, not Yoga. The first use of "kundalini" in the context of Yoga may be in Yoga Yajnavalkya Samhita (13th c.?), but this needs verification (I have so far not found an online copy of this text).

Kundalini Yoga now refers to the 3HO school of meditation, but the term has a history of course, being in use since at least 1919, possibly a few decades longer (by the Theosophic Society). Apparently it first came to be used as a synonym of Laya Yoga in this context, which seems to refer to any type of "Tantric Yoga", viz. the syncretism of the schools of Tantrism and Yoga that developed since ca. the 15th century. But this is just the history of the term, it isn't what the term now refers to. --dab (𒁳) 12:01, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

After taking a step back from the Kundalini pages for a while, I'm focusing efforts on regular cleanup of each article's opening paragraph—Kundalini yoga and Kundalini energy—in hopes that these terms and their many meanings remain distinct and clear. Morganfitzp (talk) 02:24, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

I think we can all agree that Kundalini Yoga is NOT based on Sivananda's book. Nowhere in the book Kundalini Yoga does Swami Sivananda even claim his writings are original, but rather a recapitulation of ancient techniques. Don't believe me? Download the book ($1 on Amazon). While the phrase "Kundalini Yoga" might first arise here (though 'yoga-kundalini' already existed, which would be the same in an inflected language like Sanskrit), the practices are all older than the book (by hundreds of years mostly) even if they were called laya or tantra. To say that Kundalini Yoga is "Based on a 1935 treatise by Sivananda Saraswati" is incredibly misleading, especially for the opening paragraph of this article. If no one objects, I will remove that sentence, unless someone has a citation for this wonky claim.Iṣṭa Devata (talk) 07:52, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

The Caduceus is not really a medical icon

The following passage of this article as of this writing is refering to a common misconception about the Caduceus. "This process can be seen depicted even today in modern medical iconography as two snakes spiraling a central staff, and although the origin of this image is more directly derived from the Caduceus of the Greek god Hermes, it may express the same or a similar principle.[10]"

The Caduceus is a symbol of occultism not of medicing, the rod of Asclepius is a symbol of medicin. For more info on this matter see Caduceus as a symbol of medicine

I'm not sure what to do in a situation like this nor am i a usualy a contributor to wikipedia , i hope i'm doing this the right way and i beg for forgivness and kind words of correction if i have done this the wrong way. --Letharin (talk) 05:32, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

"To Yoke" Add "/harness"?

I feel for the opening translation to read "to yoke/harness" as this second term is a much "better" translation as it includes both the literal and mundane meaning in both languages, as well as giving the English audience the unique experience that word "harness" offers in terms of the connotation of wielding/taming and using, which I believe is the meaning trying to be conferred. The literal word for "yoke" in the language of origin may have a similar effect for its speakers/their culture.

Mr.troughton (talk) 12:10, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

I think hindu use of word Yoga should be explained

Even though its not directly related to the subject of the entry I think for the sake of the general reader something should be said about the use of the word yoga as originally meant in India. The Indians recognized four forms of yoga one of which revolves around the stretching and posing which most of the people in the word associate with the word yoga. The stretching and posing is referred to as Hatha yoga iirc. All four types of yoga share similar goals of personal development. My only point here is that the general reader has the word yoga so strongly associated with Hatha yoga that this needs to be cleared up to avoid confusion when discussing Kundalini yoga. I myself have had so much difficulty with this misunderstanding that I usually refer to it as Kundalini meditation just to avoid a pointless discussion about what yoga means. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.91.29.44 (talk) 11:17, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

I feel the proper place for a discussion on the term "yoga" would be Talk:Yoga. --dab (𒁳) 11:54, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Terms "Kundalini" and "Kundalini Yoga"

well, it turns out that "kundalini" emerges as a technical term in hatha yoga in about the 16th century. As far as I can tell, it was only at the very end of the 19th or the beginning of the 20th that laya yoga (the later "Kundalini yoga") came to be seen as not part of Hatha yoga. If we would dig into this, it would presumably emerge that Nigamananda Paramahansa had a significant hand in this development. --dab (𒁳) 12:56, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Interesting. I seem to recall James Mallinson discussing it the other way around: with the distinct Laya and Hatha schools borrowing from each other forming our modern tangled amalgam. An example being Śavāsana originating in Laya and bleeding into Hatha. Vijñana Bhairava Tantra and other texts like it seem to describe a fairly Hatha-free set of samketas (tantic techniques) based on the Laya concept of dissolution. That said, I could be misinterpreting. Curious to hear any thoughts. I would also love to see some of your info bleed over onto the Nigamananda page too since there is very little mention of his kundalini teachings there. --Iṣṭa (𒁳) 23 April 2014 — Preceding undated comment added 06:10, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

From a summary of one of J Mallinson's lectures: "...the earliest texts to teach haṭhayoga (c.11th-13th centuries) shows that in its first formulations it was closely associated with traditional ascetic practice and that the aim of its techniques, which were physical, was to boost the beneficial effects of celibacy (or, at least, continence). Śākta traditions dating to a similar period had developed a system of yoga in which the yogin visualised the rising of Kuṇḍalinī from the base of the spine up through a series of cakras. This Kuṇḍalinī yoga, together with some other techniques developed in a Śākta milieu, was overlaid onto the techniques of haṭhayoga in texts such as the Vivekamārtaṇḍa, Gorakṣaśataka and Haṭhapradīpikā. The haṭhayoga taught in the latter text in particular became definitive and since its composition (c. 1450) Kuṇḍalinī-based haṭhayoga has been the dominant form of haṭhayoga, and indeed yoga more broadly conceived. The co-option of haṭhayoga by a Śākta tradition is representative of both the development within Śāktism of a less exclusive, more universal yoga..."

The form kundali exists in Classical Sanskrit (mening "ring, bracelet, coil"). This term seems to arise in at least the 11th century (possibly 8th?) in Tantrism. The adoption into Yoga seems to date to between the 13th and 16th centuries (more research needed here). By the 16th century, there was a "Yoga-Kundalini Upanishad", but this was still part of Hatha yoga. I am still hazy on when "Kundalini yoga" was first coined, perhaps this was in the late 19th century, apparently by interference with Theosophism? The term existed at the very latest in 1919 (still as a synonym of laya yoga?) and seems to have evolved into a school advocated as a standalone type of yoga by 1935, offered commercially (and trademarked) around 1972. --dab (𒁳) 11:52, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Kundalini article

The content of following box is user:Jerzy#Kundalini article copied from my talk page copied from my talk page:

Hi there, please refer to the talk page of the article previously known as kundalini. I have stated that your changes were unnecessary, unhelpful and had no consensus. Out of courtesy I ask that you revert them immediately. Please use the talk page for any further discussion. Freelion (talk) 01:33, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Indeed no longer Kundalini, which is now a Dab. Talk:Kundalini Rdr's to Talk:Kundalini yoga, so that is probably the talk page in question. Let's see what the scoop is.
--Jerzy•t 17:38, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

--Jerzy•t 17:55 &19:43, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

   I recall disambiguating "Kundalini", presumbly by converting Kundalini to a Dab page, or (more likely, judging by some summaries i see on my contribs, doing that and then turning it into a single-topic page with a HatNote to a new Dab page.) That stretch of contribs also indicates concurrent and presumably relevant discussion at User talk:Morganfitzp#‎Dab editing, which a more skilled WP editor probably would have consulted before issuing what is, however politely couched, an ultimatum. I don't recall its substance, but I would suggest you check whether you've considered whatever they and i discussed at the time.
--Jerzy•t 19:43 & 19:46, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

How to protect this page from vandalism

Any ideas? We have random ips coming on here to insert their POV against Yogi Bhajan. Nothing wrong with not liking the man, but seriously: this is an encyclopedia, not someone's angry blog. Should the page be locked, or is it easier to just ban the ips as they come up?Iṣṭa Devata (talk) 06:19, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Iṣṭa Devata! Here is a page that provides instructions, as well as a site for leaving a Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. Maybe {{lt|...}} in this case would do the trick, what do you think? There is also Wikipedia:Rough guide to semi-protection, an introductory dealing with the matter. I hope this helps! Cheers! Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 18:35, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Make this about Yoga, not Yogi Bhajan

Half of this page is about Yogi Bhajan and not about kundalini yoga. While the politics of 3HO are interesting and I take a certain pleasure in watching edit wars, all of this is thoroughly spelled out on Yogi Bhajan's wiki page (and 3HO's page). I don't see the purpose of making this article about one yogi instead of making it about a real subject like kundalini yoga, its history and the philosophy and anatomy that accompany it. Yogi Bhajan should be confined to a section or a link for further reading and then this page would stop being vandalized and ruined with copy pasted sikh propaganda against yoga and Yogi Bhajan. That's a subject that can be (and is) discussed on the Sikh pages, Bhajan's page, 3HO's page, etc. This page should have sections on subtle anatomy (cakras, nadis, nada, the debate over kundalini's mechanics etc); a history of its development and roots in tantra and hatha with pivotal texts named; how Sivananda, Krisnamacarya, and others addressed kundalini in their teachings and writings; Arthur Avalon's translation efforts; modern superimposed systems like chakra balancing, sound baths, crystal healing, rainbow colors, etcetera; and a much smaller section on it's modern history in the west linking to Bhajan's page if people want to learn more about Western Sikh Dharma Kundalini or "Yogi Bhajan's Kundalini". As it is, this page gives the false impression that what 3HO teaches is the preeminent or normative form of kundalini practice instead of a modern syncretic practice, slightly removed from its Hindu milieu. Iṣṭa Devatā (talk) 15:55, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kundalini yoga. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090610044331/http://tobias-lib.ub.uni-tuebingen.de/volltexte/2008/3596/ to http://tobias-lib.ub.uni-tuebingen.de/volltexte/2008/3596/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:19, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

"Kundalini yoga is often identified as the most dangerous form of yoga because of the involvement of subtle energies"

I'm sorry, what?!? Linuxo (talk) 09:06, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Yogi Bhajan Abusive

In the Yogi Bhajan section the abuse allegations against him need to be included. 47.33.92.56 (talk) 13:57, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Kashmir Shaivism, teach that there are multiple kundalini energies

Other schools, such as Kashmir Shaivism, teach that there are multiple kundalini energies in different parts of the body which are active and do not require awakening

Maybe they were referring to prana as kundalini. There is the connection and perceived progress between Bindu - virja/Raja -- kundalini / prana There are teachings that have all. 27.131.209.252 (talk) 05:47, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Lead of this article needs to highlight controversy

Reading recent news articles about the release of the HBO series Breath of Fire, it seems that this Wikipedia article does not reflect current POV of journalism on this topic by reliable sources. The apparent widespread sentiment that the modern practice of Kundalini yoga was largely created from scratch by a grifter and sexual predator and is fundamentally unrelated to traditional practices, should be the starting point of the article within the lead section, and not relegated to Controversy section at the end. The HBO series should also be mentioned. For recent reliable sources, see [[1]] and the references in the final section about Controversy. 144.71.77.242 (talk) 16:51, 28 October 2024 (UTC)