|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
gumpi
United Kingdom
546 Posts |
 Posted - Oct 08 2009 : 12:12:39 PM
|
| Well? |
|
|
Akasha
421 Posts |
Posted - Oct 08 2009 : 1:28:04 PM
|
I don't think it matters too much.It can be real if you want to believe such,as can anything for that matter.
Much bettter to trust your own experience over intellect or abstract ideas.In terms of empirical verification or the burden of proof, i don't think we have the scientific instruments senstive to objectively measure chakras. But that might change.
Are atoms real?- well who can say for sure.Can one be sure of anything? Does it matter?.Within a yoga mystical viewpoint it does'nt really matter-it's more the practical application of those ideas.
But just because we cannot prove something does'nt mean it is not true or does not exist.So the burden of proof should usually be on the folk that are trying to disprove such and such a theory(unless it may be sounds intuitively wrong/insane- although innovation often does at first) as you can believe or not believe anything you like. People do this especially when it serves some kind of purpose.Belief in chakras serves those practicing yoga, and trying to understand it's effects.It's as real as an atom perhaps is.Perhaps being able to see it with your own eyes makes it more real.
They used to think matter was laregly compaosed of atoms,now they think it's largely empty space-99% least.Or perhaps it's energy. If you decide what you want to look for before-hand, then you might end up finding it.I think reality is often stranger than we give it credit for but i aalso think it can be moulded by our own beliefs,paradigms,fears,conceptual prejudices etc. Seek and ye shall find.
Scepticism is good & healthy but it's best we check it out ourselves just to be sure, so we not always relying on other people's word as the final arbiter or authority on truth.
Empirical verifiablility or lack of it should'nt become a yardstick for the truth. |
 |
|
|
BellaMente
USA
147 Posts |
Posted - Oct 08 2009 : 4:27:56 PM
|
| Agreed. |
|
|
|
Thokar
USA
45 Posts |
Posted - Oct 09 2009 : 03:47:42 AM
|
| on a physical level.. no.. i dont think so.. on a spiritual level... whatever you want to call it.... astral or wahtever.. i am positive that they exist.. i am very skeptical about all things which is my nature as a pc programer/repair... but the omkara kriya that i practice where mantra is repeated in the centers... within a short time you will begin to feel the centers.. its vague at first but with many hours of dedicated practice, if this is your objective then it is very obtainable.. one you are able to feel the feeling permeating out from the centers then the sound of nada begins.. this is where kriya stops and the silent meditation begins.. the stillness and the rushing sound draw you in.. eventualy you will go breathless for short periods of time.. in my opinion this is true pratyahara.. many people speak of samahdi on these forums but in my own opinion the term is misunderstood.. Even breathlessnes doesn't directly imply samadhi.. people who have meditated countless hours throughout the years will understand what i am saying.. it is a process.. a long one.. and i truly believe some people are not built for it.. just like martial arts... one student with a body ill fit for it will not progress nearly the same as one whose body and attitude are built for fighting.. this is only my opinion.. but i truly believe true progress in meditation has to be looked at as training for anthing top level.. does a top martial artist practice 20 min twice a day.. no... now of course i understand this site is dedicated to people who are at the stage where no more should be done.. I am just putting my own opinion out there about what people should do if they intend on pushing as far as they can despite whatever risks there may be.. This is how I have continued on throughout the years with martial arts and kriya yoga mediation... |
|
|
|
karl
United Kingdom
1812 Posts |
Posted - Oct 09 2009 : 11:31:59 AM
|
20 minutes or 20 centuries is an unimportant measure when time is merely a concept. Everyone is their own Guru on this.
Akasha captures my understanding completely. |
|
|
|
michaelangelo7
USA
89 Posts |
Posted - Oct 09 2009 : 2:46:11 PM
|
| in the beginning sensations are felt in the body or spine, but when yoga culminates all yogic expereinces and trances are had in the brain. there are many traditions that completely ignore the notion of there being astral chakras in the spine and move the focus solely in the head. the seat of all siddhis is in the head. the inner sounds and lights are also in the brain. so there really is only 1 chakra or mandala, the holy brahmarandra in the head. |
|
|
|
Tibetan_Ice
Canada
758 Posts |
Posted - Oct 09 2009 : 5:13:26 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by michaelangelo7
in the beginning sensations are felt in the body or spine, but when yoga culminates all yogic expereinces and trances are had in the brain. there are many traditions that completely ignore the notion of there being astral chakras in the spine and move the focus solely in the head. the seat of all siddhis is in the head. the inner sounds and lights are also in the brain. so there really is only 1 chakra or mandala, the holy brahmarandra in the head.
Hi michaelangelo7,
Probably a lot of people are going to disagree with your statements. Me for one.
The buddhist indestructible drop lives in the heart, not the head.
The atman lives in the heart.
The heart is the seat of many mystical powers, perhaps all.
The heart is the home of God.
The heart is a doorway to untold universes and planes.
The heart transmutes the low coarse vibrations into pure light and love.
The heart is where 'you' live.
The heart will always tell you what is right.
The heart contains all, knows all and touches all.
The most powerful force in the universe is love, and we all know where that comes from.
My opinion only, limited by the inadequacy of words, thoughts and the world of forms.. but, as you read my words, if any of them resonated with you then you cannot deny it.
:)
TI |
|
|
|
Balance
USA
967 Posts |
Posted - Oct 09 2009 : 5:44:08 PM
|
| Maybe the chakras are just as real as any appearance in the energetic expression of consciousness. We focus on the spinal nerve which unites both poles of the energetic expression of consciousness and the chakras are allowed to be as they may be as we come to know ourselves as the whole being above and beyond and including any experience of separation such as the possibility of a single chakra. |
|
|
|
michaelangelo7
USA
89 Posts |
Posted - Oct 09 2009 : 6:25:51 PM
|
tibetan ice i would hope u read this or anyone else:
"Where these three nerves met, is the heart space. As we go on practicing yoga, the Bindu-sound (like that of a harmonium, or a drum or a fiddle, the ten sounds) is heard in the head. This sound is one, indivisible."
"Mukti is the indivisible. Mukti is in the heart-space."
"The head is the ocean of Ananda (joy). In it is situated the Prana Linga, i.e., the seat of liberation (Mukti). This cannot be learnt from books. It is inherent in the brain."
"When SAT unites with CHIT, Ananda (bliss) is the result. This Ananda is Paramananda, Sri Satchidananda. Paramananda is experienced in the head. In the head is in the Brahma-nadi. Brahmananda is Paramananda. Jeeva enjoys this bliss when he is one with Paramatman. This bliss is also called Shivananda. Paramananda is experienced in the head. This state is eternal joy. This state is Jeevan-Mukti."
"What we call the "heart" is not below; it is above the neck, in the head."
"Look for the all pervading God in the head! Truly look at Him in the head! Hence enjoy the eternal bliss! See this creation in the heart."
"When the Kundalini is raised to the heart space in the head, then, the breath is single. In this highest state, one sees the universe in one's Self. Then one sees everything in Him."
"The Lord of Mukti is Shiva. Shiva is the Linga in the head. This Linga is nothing but OMkar."
"What is OMkar is the subtle "Bindu" sound."
"When Jeeva leads the Shiva Shakti in man internally to the center of the brain (Brahma Randhra) and there becomes one with Shiva, the indivisible, Mukti is realized. Brahmananda is for him who has attained this Mukti."
"Where the sound of OMkar is experienced, there is no ignorance. That which is seen by the spiritual eye is the real heart. That which is seen by the physical eye is not the real heart. The greatest is the head."
"What is called Akasha (space) is in the head. Akasha is the heart space."
"the mind merges into heart space, then we will attain that eternal peace which is called "NITYANANDA"."
http://www.nityanandatradition.org/...ashgita.html
|
Edited by - michaelangelo7 on Oct 09 2009 6:58:26 PM |
|
|
|
Konchok Ösel Dorje
USA
545 Posts |
Posted - Oct 09 2009 : 9:50:35 PM
|
| No. They are not real. They are a dream. |
|
|
|
Tibetan_Ice
Canada
758 Posts |
Posted - Oct 09 2009 : 10:27:26 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by michaelangelo7
tibetan ice i would hope u read this or anyone else:
"Where these three nerves met, is the heart space. As we go on practicing yoga, the Bindu-sound (like that of a harmonium, or a drum or a fiddle, the ten sounds) is heard in the head. This sound is one, indivisible."
"Mukti is the indivisible. Mukti is in the heart-space."
"The head is the ocean of Ananda (joy). In it is situated the Prana Linga, i.e., the seat of liberation (Mukti). This cannot be learnt from books. It is inherent in the brain."
"When SAT unites with CHIT, Ananda (bliss) is the result. This Ananda is Paramananda, Sri Satchidananda. Paramananda is experienced in the head. In the head is in the Brahma-nadi. Brahmananda is Paramananda. Jeeva enjoys this bliss when he is one with Paramatman. This bliss is also called Shivananda. Paramananda is experienced in the head. This state is eternal joy. This state is Jeevan-Mukti."
"What we call the "heart" is not below; it is above the neck, in the head."
"Look for the all pervading God in the head! Truly look at Him in the head! Hence enjoy the eternal bliss! See this creation in the heart."
"When the Kundalini is raised to the heart space in the head, then, the breath is single. In this highest state, one sees the universe in one's Self. Then one sees everything in Him."
"The Lord of Mukti is Shiva. Shiva is the Linga in the head. This Linga is nothing but OMkar."
"What is OMkar is the subtle "Bindu" sound."
"When Jeeva leads the Shiva Shakti in man internally to the center of the brain (Brahma Randhra) and there becomes one with Shiva, the indivisible, Mukti is realized. Brahmananda is for him who has attained this Mukti."
"Where the sound of OMkar is experienced, there is no ignorance. That which is seen by the spiritual eye is the real heart. That which is seen by the physical eye is not the real heart. The greatest is the head."
"What is called Akasha (space) is in the head. Akasha is the heart space."
"the mind merges into heart space, then we will attain that eternal peace which is called "NITYANANDA"."
http://www.nityanandatradition.org/...ashgita.html
Hi Michaelangelo7,
First, please let me say that I have great respect for Bhagavan Nityananda and his lineage and it saddens me to have to expose the inconsistencies in the Chidakash Gita. I have read "Play of Consciousness" by Muktananda and also have most of Mark Griffin's books and audio downloads.
The inconsistencies in the Chidakash Gita caused me to diregard the entire teaching as unfathomable and certainly contrary to most other teachings.
For example, please take a look at verse 209 in the Chidakash Gita:
quote:
209. The throat place is the 'Muladhara' where the serpent power (Kundalini) is originated. The heart space is the place for the throat place. The heart space is in the middle of the eye brows. 'Swadhisthana' is in the brain. Ajna is triangular. What is called 'Raja Yoga' is above the neck. Ajna is the locality where man attains Mukti. What is called 'this world' is Jivatma. What is called the 'next world' is Paramatma. The union of these two is the space of consciousness. Chit is the mental mood. Sat is the one, indivisible.
Let us start with the first statement:
quote:
The throat place is the 'Muladhara' where the serpent power (Kundalini) is originated.
The Muladhara is the root chakra, not the throat place. Kundalini originates in the root at the base of the spine at the perineum, not at the throat chakra.
Next:
quote:
The heart space is the place for the throat place. The heart space is in the middle of the eye brows.
What does this mean: "The heart space is the place for the throat place"? I cannot understand that.
The statement that "The heart space is in the middle of the eye brows" is very confusing. Is the heart space the ajna/brow/third eye? Red flags are going up for me now..
quote:
'Swadhisthana' is in the brain.
Swadhisthana, otherwise known as the second, or sacral chakra is positioned at the tailbone, two finger-widths above Muladhara. It is not "in the brain".
If Nityananda has a penchant for talking in metaphors, this is certainly not the place to use them.
I remember that when I read Nityananda and Muktananda's writings, I had decided not to give the chakra anatomy part any credence due to the confusing unconventional teachings. Anybody can write anything down on paper, it doesn't mean that it is true or that you have to believe it.
The only thing I will say is that I believe Nityananda was using the term "Heart" as a metaphor.
In any case, I still believe that the chest heart chakra is more powerful than anything found in the head. Each to his own.
Thank you for your comments and quotes.
OM SHANTI
:)
TI
|
|
|
|
Etherfish
USA
3615 Posts |
Posted - Oct 09 2009 : 10:41:34 PM
|
The chakras are a function of life force, prana, chi.
Science can't verify them because it can't detect life force.
For instance, I used to work in surgery. When they want to harvest the organs of a dead person, sometimes they artificially keep the heart of the dead person going to preserve the organs. How is this person different from a person in deep meditation with a pacemaker? Science can't tell. |
Edited by - Etherfish on Oct 09 2009 10:42:19 PM |
|
|
|
gumpi
United Kingdom
546 Posts |
Posted - Oct 10 2009 : 12:24:00 PM
|
Thank you for all your opinions.
Personally, i do not believe the chakras exist. It is not cynicism to doubt the existence of such things, it is open minded enquiry. If i were to categorically state as a fact that chakras didn't exist i could be accused of cynical skepticism. I am open minded to the degree that they COULD exist, but my opinion is that they do not.
For starters, consider the fact that children do not talk about chakras. Consider that the medical establishments, both alternative and mainstream, do not have care for persons with chakra difficulties. Ask yourself why.
I can't pretend to speak for all people, but when i was a kid i knew nobody that talked about chakras amongst my peers.
It is safer to assume that the chakras are merely biofeedback points in the physical body that hatha yogis use to manipulate the involuntary nervous system and organs.
Consider also the apparent "fact" that it is a universal experience for all people that have an Out of Body Experience that there are no chakras involved.
Some people try to equate the chakras with brain regions and endocrine glands. I do not consider this legitimate according to the yoga literature i have read, which make it explicity clear that the chakras do exist but that they are part of subtle energy body anatomy, extending down the spine and back etc.
Finally, i am completely convinced that autohypnosis or self-hypnosis is entirely responsible for individuals' perceptions of the reality of chakras. I would also extend this to the perceptions of light that occur in hypnagogic states and a whole load of subjective experiences that occur in meditation. Now, i don't discount meditation nor do i disbelieve in the existence of ESP, precognition, out of body experiences and near death experiences. But i see no actual evidence for the reality of the chakras.
|
|
|
|
gumpi
United Kingdom
546 Posts |
Posted - Oct 10 2009 : 12:27:05 PM
|
Ether,
it is indeed mightily puzzling that there doesn't appear to be any difference, physically and physiologically speaking, between a living body and a dead body. This is one of the best arguments for the existence of subtle life force. Together with this we have the mystery of the origin of life and the universe, which science (nor mysticism in my opinion) cannot explain.
|
|
|
|
Tibetan_Ice
Canada
758 Posts |
Posted - Nov 26 2009 : 10:22:00 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
The inconsistencies in the Chidakash Gita caused me to diregard the entire teaching as unfathomable and certainly contrary to most other teachings.
...
The Muladhara is the root chakra, not the throat place. Kundalini originates in the root at the base of the spine at the perineum, not at the throat chakra.
...
Swadhisthana, otherwise known as the second, or sacral chakra is positioned at the tailbone, two finger-widths above Muladhara. It is not "in the brain".
I remember that when I read Nityananda and Muktananda's writings, I had decided not to give the chakra anatomy part any credence due to the confusing unconventional teachings. Anybody can write anything down on paper, it doesn't mean that it is true or that you have to believe it.
The only thing I will say is that I believe Nityananda was using the term "Heart" as a metaphor.
Hi Everyone :)
I wish to retract these statements concerning the location of the heart and chakras. Upon further education and learning, I have discovered that Ramana said that the true heart is not really in the right side of the chest.
From this link: http://www.davidgodman.org/rteach/whoami1.shtml
quote:
Hridayam is usually translated as 'Heart', but it has no connection with the physical heart. Bhagavan used it as a synonym for the Self, pointing out on several occasions that it could be split up into two parts, hrit and ayam, which together mean, 'this is the centre'. Sometimes he would say that the 'I'-thought arises from the hridayam and eventually subsides there again. He would also sometimes indicate that the spiritual Heart was inside the body on the right aside of the chest, but he would often qualify this by saying that this was only true from the standpoint of those who identified themselves with a body. For a jnani, one who has realised the Self, the hridayam or Heart is not located anywhere, or even everywhere, because it is beyond all spatial concepts. The following answer (2) summarises Bhagavan's views on this matter:
I ask you to see where the 'I' arises in your body, but it is not really quite true to say that the 'I' rises from and merges on the right side of the chest. The Heart is another name for the reality, and it is neither inside nor outside the body. There can be no in or out for it since it alone is#65533; so long as one identifies with the body and thinks that he is in the body, he is advised to see where in the body the 'I'-thought rises and merges again.
Further, on this site it says that once kundalini has risen the practitioner begins to build a golden body, which is located higher up above the head. So it is entirely possible that Nityananda was referring to the golden body's chakras which would explain why the locations are not depicted in conventional locations!
Here is the link:
http://www.himalayanacademy.com/res...s_ch-42.html
quote:
Actually, there are more chakras above and within the sahasrara. Buddhist literature cites thirty-two chakras above. Agamic Hindu tradition cites seven levels of the rarefied dimensions of Paranada, the first tattva, as chanted daily by hundreds of thousands of priests during puja in temples all over the world. Their names are: vyapini, vyomanga, ananta, anatha, anashrita, samana and unmana. I have experienced these higher chakras or nadis, as they are in this subtle region, as conglomerates of nadis. These force centers are not exactly chakras, as they are not connected to any organ or part of the physical body. They are chakras or nadis of the body of the soul, which when developed as a result of many, many, many Parasiva experiences, slowly descend into the mental and astral bodies. The mental body becomes permanently different in its philosophical outlook, and the astral body begins to absorb and be transformed by the golden body, or svarnasharira.
and this one:
http://www.himalayanacademy.com/res...s_ch-48.html
quote:
Sunday
LESSON 336
Birth of the Golden Body
The golden body, svarnasharira, is a body made of golden light. After many experiences of Parasiva, it gradually descends from the seven chakras above the sahasrara into the ajna chakra, which then becomes the soul's muladhara, then down into the vishuddha chakra, which then becomes its muladhara, and then down into the anahata, which then becomes its muladhara.
All seven chakras above the sahasrara slowly come down and down and down until the entire astral body is psychically seen, by mystics who have this sight, as a golden body. The astral body slowly, slowly, slowly dissolves into the golden body. That is what I have seen happen. That is what our parampara and our sampradaya know from experience. Experience is the only true knowing -- a knowing that can be verified in books, through others who have the same knowing, but a knowing that no others know who have not had the same experience. To them it is only a concept, a nice one maybe, but just a concept or written off as an opinion.
So, I wish to apologize to Nityananda for my limited perspective and hope to gain in further understanding of the mysteries of the chakras and the golden body so that my lack of knowledge may never mislead anyone on the spiritual path.
:)
TI
|
|
|
|
chinna
United Kingdom
241 Posts |
Posted - Nov 27 2009 : 5:57:30 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by gumpi
Well?
What do you mean by real?
chinna |
|
|
|
gumpi
United Kingdom
546 Posts |
Posted - Nov 27 2009 : 6:19:43 PM
|
"real" means true. it means reality. it means reality in truth. it means objectivity. it means objective facts that include subjective facts.
Are chakras any of those things? No, and nobody can prove they exist. They are simply hypnotic hallucinations in most people. In some people they are that plus centre of attention training on the nervous system down the spine. these things have no reality in objective reality.
If chakras are not real, then any writing or speech about them is either a lie, a delusion, a combination of them, or plain dishonest. |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4379 Posts |
Posted - Nov 27 2009 : 7:59:08 PM
|
Hi Gumpi,
When you start to become aware of the chakras in your own body, then you know that they are at least a real subjective experience. When you start to become aware of chakras in other people's bodies, and they are also aware of the chakras in your body, then you know that chakras are both a subjective and an objective experience, just like trees and sunsets.
My children talk to me about their chakras. A friend of mine once asked my eldest daughter if she could feel her own heart inside her body, and she said: "Yes, I can feel it when it opens". 
Christi |
|
|
|
Etherfish
USA
3615 Posts |
Posted - Nov 27 2009 : 10:01:58 PM
|
Wow, Christi!
Yes, there are a lot of things in reality that children can sense, then we "unlearn" them as we join the collective consciousness of "proven" beliefs.
We are lucky to be here in an age when more and more people are experiencing things like chakras so they are more easily accepted than just a few years ago. This is an exciting time.
Just think of the scientific advances made in our lifetimes.
When I was little, cold case crimes couldn't be solved with DNA, pluto was a planet, there were no cell phones or computers, they didn't do heart transplants, had no idea what the appendix, adenoids or spleen were for, hadn't travelled in space, and americans believed that all chinese medicine and alternative healing had no validity whatsoever.
Now you can buy a cheap little detector that senses the meridians that acupuncturists have told us they could feel for thousands of years.
Western science still does not recognize prana flow or meridians.
So people tell us what they experience, and when a lot of people experience the same thing, it begins to be accepted with those who don't yet experience it.
But it is the experiential agreements that make it part of reality, not the science.
Science changes it's mind every few years about whether coffee or butter or eggs are good for you.
All the while reality has never changed.
Some people believe their perception more than science.
Others believe science more than their perception.
Then there are people who have experienced chakras or kundalini who didn't believe they were real!
Does that prove they are real? Only for some people.
What matters is the quality of interaction between people. Relating your experiences is one form of interaction, and your experiences are only "real" for you.
We are intimately connected with reality, and reality changes as people's perception changes.
This can't be proven yet, but sub-atomic science is bumping up against that truth as we speak.
Google the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, or superstring theory where reality must be composed of more dimensions than we can sense. |
|
|
|
gumpi
United Kingdom
546 Posts |
Posted - Nov 28 2009 : 07:23:58 AM
|
That's strange really, since when i was a child i'm pretty damn sure i never saw any chakras.
Acupuncture - it was discovered that it didn't matter where the needles were placed for the effect to occur. Therefore it is a placebo. |
|
|
|
Jivaakabhasana_Yogi
USA
49 Posts |
Posted - Nov 28 2009 : 09:31:10 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by gumpi
That's strange really, since when i was a child i'm pretty damn sure i never saw any chakras.
Acupuncture - it was discovered that it didn't matter where the needles were placed for the effect to occur. Therefore it is a placebo.
Actually, I don't know wher you got this information but it is incorrect, several university studies, in California, one in New York, one in Hawaaii shows differently...
Jivaakabhasana_Yogi |
|
|
|
Clear White Light
USA
229 Posts |
Posted - Nov 28 2009 : 09:39:19 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by gumpi
That's strange really, since when i was a child i'm pretty damn sure i never saw any chakras.
Acupuncture - it was discovered that it didn't matter where the needles were placed for the effect to occur. Therefore it is a placebo.
Who says you have to see something for them to be real? We aren't debating the "objectivity" of emotions, although they are just as elusive as the chakras..possibly even more so, as the activities of the chakras are MUCH more uniform and systemic from person to person than emotions are. Previously you stated as a "fact" that there are no chakras involved in accounts of out of body experience. I'm not sure which accounts you are reading, but almost every account of OBE I have ever read involves heavy heart chakra activity.
As for acupuncture, have you ever had acupuncture? You're going to have to qualify such a vague statement with more facts, otherwise what is the point? I could just as easy say "Recently it was discovered that the chakras are real.", and it would be an equally pointless statement.. |
Edited by - Clear White Light on Nov 28 2009 11:29:01 AM |
|
|
|
Etherfish
USA
3615 Posts |
Posted - Nov 28 2009 : 10:46:01 AM
|
We forget a lot of what we experienced as kids, because adults teach us what is real or not. I remember having all kinds of psychic experiences when I was little, and the response from my parents was always the same "That's not real". I remember thinking time and again that there were things my parents didn't understand but I did. Who knows how much i have forgotten because of being taught it wasn't real.
----------------
Yes, "Scientific studies" are often worthless because of biases. All of the drugs that have been removed from the market because of horrendous and lethal side effects had "studies" "proving" them to be safe. Only when you start to have lots of studies by unbiased scientists, does there begin to be some consensus. Studies are often wrong. The reason is that phenomena have to be isolated for control groups, and the less that is known about a phenomena, the harder it is to isolate it.
I know a scientist, and I have shown her two or three studies in repudable peer reviewed journals "proving" something, and she said "That's not enough". True scientists need a lot more to even begin to consider something may be true, and there are a lot of grey areas.
Good scientists don't think in terms of "that has been proven". They think like "that has a high probability of having some validity." Supermarket tabloid science jumps to conclusions from insufficient evidence, and look how repudable they are. Here in the USA, "The National Enquirer" is known to always have evidence to back up their stories, and yet they are still laughed at for printing unsubstantiated science.
|
|
|
|
Jivaakabhasana_Yogi
USA
49 Posts |
Posted - Nov 28 2009 : 10:52:49 AM
|
Very good point,
To use the ancient description of the rope and snake is to really get to the heart of the matter...the individual mistakenly looks at a rope and sees a snake...the "snake" is in "his 'world'" (i.e., has no reality outside of his self existent experience), but nonetheless the rope "exists" (whatever that really means anyhow.
While there are many schools of Indian/Eastern Gnostic/Western thought with many ways to understand this phenomenon my understanding has always been, I guess what might be called dvait-advaita...that the Self/Witness etc. and subject/object awareness arise concurrently, cannot be separated....that the "manifest world" is prakriti, or primal matter (first mother) and our shifting attention/awarness/thought patterns shape this into whatever "exists" for us....I am not "in" a body, the body is "in me," is a point of centeral focus for the manifestation of my will/intent and awareness.
Knowing this, then, the above phenomenon, becomes a mysterious blessing...the power of imagination is the power of reality, and in this sense, therefore, it doesn't even matter if "science" can detect chakr' or meridians or the like....
A few short decades ago they said there was nothing "smaller" than the atom, and that the universe was a "fixed mechanical system" and now it has been revealed through quantum (sp?) physics that this is incorrect. So, are we to say that such was never "real" because it was outside of our awareness at that current time?
Anyhow, food for though! :-)
I hope all had a blessed feast of Thanksgiving
Jivaakabhasana_Yogi |
|
|
|
gumpi
United Kingdom
546 Posts |
Posted - Nov 28 2009 : 11:34:59 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Clear White Light
quote:
Originally posted by gumpi
That's strange really, since when i was a child i'm pretty damn sure i never saw any chakras.
Acupuncture - it was discovered that it didn't matter where the needles were placed for the effect to occur. Therefore it is a placebo.
Who says you have to see something for them to be real? We aren't debating the "objectivity" of emotions, although they are just as elusive as the chakras..possibly even more so, as the activities of the chakras are MUCH more uniform and systemic from person to person than emotions are. Previously you stated as a "fact" that there are no chakras involved in accounts of out of body experience. I'm not sure which accounts you are reading, but almost every account of OBE I have ever read involves heavy heart chakra activity.
As for acupuncture, have you ever had acupuncture? You're going to have to qualify such a vague statement with more facts, otherwise what is the point? I could just as easy say "Recently it was discovered that the chakras are real.", and it would be an equally useless statement..
You are going to have a hard time convincing the majority of the population of the world of the non-existence of emotions as compared to chakras. I guarantee that.
I can see you are ignorant of the scientific studies on acupuncture. If you knew anything about it you wouldn't have responded in this way. I can point to loads of studies and webpages to back up what i am saying but what is the point? If you really want me to, i will.
As for reading accounts of OBEs, i have read my fair share and absolutely none of them talk about a heart chakra. Sorry. Can you provide any evidence of an OBE related experience that talks specifically about a heart chakra?
I think it is something of a non-sequitor to use past ignorance in science with reference to the potential reality of chakras. How many people do you know who don't experience chakras? A balanced approach is needed here, instead of a bias in favour of their reality (which incidentally, you see too much of on forums like this). Also, if you are going to say that imagination is proof of chakras i really think you should stay out of the discussion.
I am not championing science as some kind of be all and end all of knowledge. However, it is the best tool we have and not to use it seems rather silly to me.
Isn't it obvious from the title of this thread that the reality of chakras is not sufficiently substantiated? It may be to you but you are going to have to do better than, "because i say so" to produce any kind of objectivity. Where is the evidence? So far, i have been told about acupuncture and meridians but these things are not chakras and their reality is highly questionable.
You may have practiced some form of kriya yoga for a while and come to the conclusion that chakras are real. However, practising concentrating on the spinal plexuses by means of biofeedback is not proof of chakras - it is proof of altering the actions of the autonomic nervous system, which is purely physical.
As to children being aware of things that adults aren't i am sure there is some truth in this but again, it doesn't involve chakras. |
|
|
|
CarsonZi
Canada
3189 Posts |
Posted - Nov 28 2009 : 2:56:37 PM
|
Hey Gumpi and All.......
There is a lot that "modern" science is just becoming aware of....even the acupuncture meridains a few years ago were considered "hocus pocus" because they were unable to be seen physically....now we know that the meridians in the body are composed of "hyaluronic acid" (see google results here: http://www.google.ca/search?q=hyalu...en&source=hp ) .....I personally can feel my chakras spinning much of the time, and can feel certian chakras reacting to specific influence, so for me, the chakras are indeed real....experientially real....to others who have not yet felt their own chakras, they are not, or they are just an idea/belief. That is cool too. I just think that placing too much emphasis on what can be "seen" or what has been verified by modern science is a bit of a waste of time....I prefer (and believe it is more valuable to the individual) to spend time finding out what is real for themselves.... If you believe that the chakras don't exist Gumpi, then that is what you believe....but just remember that attaching to that belief will make it so that you will never feel them for yourself....you aren't giving yourself the opportunity to. Stay open to everything and perhaps in time your belief will change...with the experience of feeling the chakras in your own body. In my own personal life people often wonder if I have an "itch problem" on the top of my head because the spinning of the crown chakra makes my head itch quite often and I am often itching my head....But that siad, my experience will not dictate reality for you....and it shouldn't. Just stay open....if you believe the chakras don't exist, then perhaps you should suspend belief or disbelief for a while until you have personal experience to KNOW one way or the other.
Just another opinion.
Love,
Carson |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
Are the Chakras real?
