| Revision as of 22:13, 27 January 2010 editFatehji (talk | contribs)365 editsm →Kundalini Yoga Benefits, Not Secret or Harmful, Stop the Bigotry: fixed title of section← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:39, 28 January 2010 edit undoFatehji (talk | contribs)365 edits →Kundalini Yoga Benefits, Not Secret or Harmful, Stop the Bigotry: commenting out excessive talk and warring. not conducive to getting down to a solution.Next edit → | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
| :Additionally, the whole concept of linking this so called "syndrome" to the yoga itself is an error in thinking. The syndrome refers to the dormant energy in all humans="kundalini". But Kundalini Yoga is just one yoga, like Raja or Hatha, and - like all yogas - they are all exercises and meditations that work with the Kundalini energy. It is the goal of all yogas to "raise the kundalini"(awareness). So, the "syndrome" actually refers to all spiritual practices. It only happens to be coined this way because some psuedoscientist made it up. It has nothing directly to do with "Kundalini Yoga".] (]) 00:08, 26 January 2010 (UTC) | :Additionally, the whole concept of linking this so called "syndrome" to the yoga itself is an error in thinking. The syndrome refers to the dormant energy in all humans="kundalini". But Kundalini Yoga is just one yoga, like Raja or Hatha, and - like all yogas - they are all exercises and meditations that work with the Kundalini energy. It is the goal of all yogas to "raise the kundalini"(awareness). So, the "syndrome" actually refers to all spiritual practices. It only happens to be coined this way because some psuedoscientist made it up. It has nothing directly to do with "Kundalini Yoga".] (]) 00:08, 26 January 2010 (UTC) | ||
| == Kundalini Yoga Benefits |
== Kundalini Yoga Benefits == | ||
| <!-- COMMENTING OUT UNDUE WARRING, DOESN'T ADD TO THIRD PARTY REQUEST --> | |||
| I respectfully disagree completely. This is exactly what I would call misinformation, or misdirection of information. The only thing not making sense is your argument. First of all, you keep claiming this Syndrome is well documented, yet you offer no sources. I have counter sourced you with a US Congressional resolution recognizing its wide range of benefits, and also books by Doctors of all the benefits of the systems. There is an extremely healthy practice of Kundalini Yoga in the US where many people in hospitals, schools and work are helped with their problems with this yoga. No one has every developed "mental damage" from this style through practice that is "widely documented from a legitimate source. In fact, if anything it is widely used to heal mental damage, not cause it! You should try it, because it is known by experience and not talk, and it could help you.] (]) 06:42, 25 January 2010 (UTC) | <!-- I respectfully disagree completely. This is exactly what I would call misinformation, or misdirection of information. The only thing not making sense is your argument. First of all, you keep claiming this Syndrome is well documented, yet you offer no sources. I have counter sourced you with a US Congressional resolution recognizing its wide range of benefits, and also books by Doctors of all the benefits of the systems. There is an extremely healthy practice of Kundalini Yoga in the US where many people in hospitals, schools and work are helped with their problems with this yoga. No one has every developed "mental damage" from this style through practice that is "widely documented from a legitimate source. In fact, if anything it is widely used to heal mental damage, not cause it! You should try it, because it is known by experience and not talk, and it could help you.] (]) 06:42, 25 January 2010 (UTC) | ||
| Here's where you really mislead and misdirect. ALL YOGA forms work towards raising of the Kundalini energy. Kundalini doesn't have a copyright by Hindus (which you've claimed that over and over again) You claim that one cannot understand or benefit from Kundalini Yoga because it must be taught by a Spiritual master or given by a blessing of God... Which GOD do you mean exactly? (I assume you mean a Hindu one, because actually Yogi Bhajan was a Master of Kundalini Yoga at age 16, and in Sikh teachings, there is only One GOD, and that GOD is simultaneously in everyone, so everyone has the right to self-initiate themselves into the practice). Anything like claiming that a Hindu God only can give benefits is the very definition of a bigotry. To the contrary of what you claim, this system, is already being widely taught and the benefits are safe and countless! You cannot copyright enlightenment, love, or healing. You can't copyright Yoga. It's shown that this system can be practiced by anyone of any age and they can have huge benefits in short times.] (]) 06:42, 25 January 2010 (UTC) | Here's where you really mislead and misdirect. ALL YOGA forms work towards raising of the Kundalini energy. Kundalini doesn't have a copyright by Hindus (which you've claimed that over and over again) You claim that one cannot understand or benefit from Kundalini Yoga because it must be taught by a Spiritual master or given by a blessing of God... Which GOD do you mean exactly? (I assume you mean a Hindu one, because actually Yogi Bhajan was a Master of Kundalini Yoga at age 16, and in Sikh teachings, there is only One GOD, and that GOD is simultaneously in everyone, so everyone has the right to self-initiate themselves into the practice). Anything like claiming that a Hindu God only can give benefits is the very definition of a bigotry. To the contrary of what you claim, this system, is already being widely taught and the benefits are safe and countless! You cannot copyright enlightenment, love, or healing. You can't copyright Yoga. It's shown that this system can be practiced by anyone of any age and they can have huge benefits in short times.] (]) 06:42, 25 January 2010 (UTC) | ||
| Line 65: | Line 66: | ||
| Don't claim you want to represent ALL views either, when it's clear you are simply coming from one view point. Your words are important, don't keep writing stuff that simply isn't true - especially about yourself. You will have to live through the mud of your communication, so don't spoil it today. Your words live on forever, especially here on Misplaced Pages.] (]) 14:15, 27 January 2010 (UTC) | Don't claim you want to represent ALL views either, when it's clear you are simply coming from one view point. Your words are important, don't keep writing stuff that simply isn't true - especially about yourself. You will have to live through the mud of your communication, so don't spoil it today. Your words live on forever, especially here on Misplaced Pages.] (]) 14:15, 27 January 2010 (UTC) | ||
| --> | |||
| I am not changing your "edits" (or actually, they are not edits, rather simply you just re-post the same thing every time), because of "conflicting views". I am changing them because they are simply not relevant, poorly sourced, and do not add to the topic. It makes no sense to reference a negative single view at the top of the page when this is one small, tiny view or issue which has an unprofessional reference material source This is called undue weighting . Additionally you do not do any service to Misplaced Pages by enforcing what you have admitted to, as your "negative view of Yogi Bhajan", and I have tried to correct the negative bias out of your "edits". Plus, you do not address my points appropriately in reply to talk back discussion as to the validity of your edits, so therefore, I will continue to improve and correct them. ] (]) 15:01, 27 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| My view of Yogi Bhajan positive for all the good things he did. ] (]) 17:37, 27 January 2010 (UTC) | My view of Yogi Bhajan positive for all the good things he did. ] (]) 17:37, 27 January 2010 (UTC) | ||
| You are continuing to misunderstand what this Encyclopedia is about and how to edit properly, as well as the purpose and scope of references. You have changed back AGAIN, for perhaps the |
You are continuing to misunderstand what this Encyclopedia is about and how to edit properly, as well as the purpose and scope of references. You have changed back AGAIN, for perhaps the 12th time to the EXACT same sentence which I have rebuffed over and over again in discussions and comments. You are clearly not interested in reaching a consensus with me on this matter. I have shown again and again why your edit was changed, and have added to it, and helped shape it into a better description. You seem to think that once a "reference" is created, it cannot be changed. Sorry, but this is not helping the editing process and reaching a consensus to make an article more legitimate and clear. A reference doesn't mean once you reference something that other editors cannot add onto it to clarify or expand to your edits if it adds to an understanding of the topic. Clearly you have not read the citation and source guides on Misplaced Pages. Please read and study this before you make any more changes. You need to read these: ] ] and ] and ]--] (]) 18:59, 27 January 2010 (UTC) | ||
| The main problem is you started this and you tried to remove and water down problems related to the certain practices of Kundalini Yoga. Edits can be expanded, but not in conflict with the meaning in the reference. You can not say, water is pure and dirty at the same time. We can reach a consensus, if you agree to include the reference to "mental damage" and link "Kundalini Syndrome" in the beginning of the article. You have to understand that the paragraph you are attacking, is a rather mild version from the original source and already very much adapted. The point is that traditional Hinduism obviously does not agree with Yogi Bhajan's teachings, at least as you presented them, and that we have to find a way to include both views. There is no consensus possible in the sense of presenting only one combined viewpoint, because the differences are too big. The Wiki references you mention apply to you the same way as they apply to me. All the sources in the paragraph are verifiable and reliable in the context of the subject of this article. If you agree, I can also include direct quotes from the book's.] (]) 20:11, 27 January 2010 (UTC) | :The main problem is you started this and you tried to remove and water down problems related to the certain practices of Kundalini Yoga. Edits can be expanded, but not in conflict with the meaning in the reference. You can not say, water is pure and dirty at the same time. We can reach a consensus, if you agree to include the reference to "mental damage" and link "Kundalini Syndrome" in the beginning of the article. You have to understand that the paragraph you are attacking, is a rather mild version from the original source and already very much adapted. The point is that traditional Hinduism obviously does not agree with Yogi Bhajan's teachings, at least as you presented them, and that we have to find a way to include both views. There is no consensus possible in the sense of presenting only one combined viewpoint, because the differences are too big. The Wiki references you mention apply to you the same way as they apply to me. All the sources in the paragraph are verifiable and reliable in the context of the subject of this article. If you agree, I can also include direct quotes from the book's.] (]) 20:11, 27 January 2010 (UTC) | ||
| Atma, I am not attacking your "references" nor am I trying to water anything down. In fact, the main dispute is over that I am trying to correct what you have hyped up. I don't understand why you propose this view, but it's not relevant to Kundalini yoga as a primary concern. You may disagree, so I have posted additional references to show that this view is not definitive by any means. I am adding to the paragraph with other references from Hindu teachers - on the same par as your reference's source. You have no right to strike one teachers down, while you revert to solely your own teachers views. | |||
| So this is not by any means as you claim "in conflict with the meaning in reference". It's a new source that expands upon it and offers a different view. You make it sound and (from your actions) appear like once you have added a source, that that is the final word, and no other sources can refute or add to this claim. Perhaps then you should consider that the entire argument, if it is debatable should not be posted right up in the front of the page, but moved down to its own section. Only DUE legitimate claims should be presented in the article as a whole, but certainly in the top of the page, it's essential to provide a due weighted neutral view that can be agreed upon. But for some reason, you don't want to hear any different view, so you removed my references 5 times in one day to the exact same edit you have been running since Jan 18th - over a week ago. Your history shows you don't seem interested in compromise or consensus. This should get you blocked and it also got the page blocked. Now what will you do? We're supposed to work this out by Feb 3rd, and you haven't changed one inch since Jan 18th. Actually, I'd rather get a third party to look at it. Until you can demonstrate change, I believe you've exhausted your range of input into this topic.--] (]) 21:20, 27 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Request for verification and clean up of disputed content == | == Request for verification and clean up of disputed content == | ||
Revision as of 02:39, 28 January 2010
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Kundalini yoga article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1, 2, 3 |
 | Hinduism Start‑class | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | Alternative medicine Start‑class | ||||||
| |||||||
"Kundalini Syndrome" and Kundalini Yoga
The occurrence of various problems with relation to practice of Kundalini Yoga is well documented. From what I was able to understand, the Western approach considers that spiritual progress can be achieved through the practices alone, but the Hindu tradition considers practices only as a part of the preparation of the body, where the actual rise of the Kundalini is achieved through the grace of the Gurudev (blessing), which must be a living Self-Realized master. The methods for preparation of the body were in fact held secret in order to protect people from hurting themselves, by trying things for which they had no deeper understanding, and to protect the name and the value of Yoga. Various stories in the West arose why the methods are secret. Some claimed that great (supernatural) powers can be achieved through practice of Kriya Yoga and that methods were secret for selfish reasons. In the 19th century many Yogis in India were also tortured to death by westerns to reveal the secret of their powers. (See reports by Elisabeth Haich.) That is another reason, why the methods were held secret. But one will not and can not attain any real progress or power though the practices alone. This happens only through the Grace of God alone and that grace can not be extorted. According to Hinduism practice of various methods can deliver progress only up to a certain level beyond which a living Spiritual Master becomes a necessity. Trying to force the results, is when the problems arise. Various methods require years of practice before next level can be considered. Jumping forward without guidance can lead to disaster. It is important to understand that the aim of the Kundalini Yoga is not to acquire various powers (which are considered vice on the spiritual path), but to achieve moksha and union with God. Abuse of siddhis has grave karmic consequences. This all must be viewed in the light of teaching known from all holly books, Bible, Koran, Bhagavad Gita,... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Atmapuri (talk • contribs) 08:22, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Further on the topic of benefits of Kundalini Yoga and supposed dangers of practice. Many teachers will use the word Kundalini to emphasize something that is to be more effective practice than other to make it more attractive on the market. On each level of spiritual development different methods apply. It is true that even a prayer is a start, meditation is better, and so on... Spiritual development at any speed eventually leads to Kundalini awakening. If one takes smaller steps, they are safer and more people can harvest more benefits with less risk. Taking larger steps and more demanding techniques leads to greater benefits but also risks. At some point one eventually needs a Spiritual Master to be able to continue. Now, we cannot take the good results of the simple methods and advertise the more complex method as suitable for the general public. Somehow, a balance must be found so that everything that people stuffed under the word "Kundalini" still makes sense. Atmapuri (talk) 21:49, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
- I have nominated that your references to "Kundalini Syndrome" on the Kundalini Yoga page be dropped entirely. The concept itself is pseudo-scientific and baseless. The article you link to on Misplaced Pages is already flagged as needing professional verification, and thus is not a good source reference to be used on other pages. "Kundalini Syndrome" mainly refers to changes in "Kundalini Energy", and NOT the YOGA FORM. Any reference to Yoga + Kundalini Syndrome do not EVER specify any particular system of yoga, and in fact yoga as a spiritual practice leading to kundalini syndrome is hypothetical and listed as only one possible cause out of many different potential instances. Therefore any link to Kundalini Yoga directly is very very tenuous and only is mistaken this way because of the name similarities. Stop revising the history and re-placing this in the top paragraphs. This does Yoga as a whole and Kundalini Yoga no service and is misleading. If you replace it here, you would have to place it on EVERY YOGA PAGE and EVERY SPIRITUAL DISCIPLINE page, including martial arts, qi gong, etc. etc.. It makes no sense. This is a very rare "condition" of "symptoms" that have no record of "permanent mental damage" and mostly leads to happiness and greater self-awareness when it occurs. Your reference by your teacher is not scientific, nor legitimate and only creates confusion. If you want to discuss why a 1st source spiritual teacher warning about mental damage is not legitimate, that can be discussed, however, its self-evident he is not a doctor, nor does he support his claim with ANY relevant data. You simply pulled this quote to cherry pick what you wanted to promote - his book has nothing to do with "Kundalini syndrome". In fact, he says in his own Guru's words that: "Kundalini is the divine mother. A true mother never causes harm or does anything bad to her children." (quoted from your same book from your source, Paramhans Swami Maheshwarananda, page 49). According to his view true kundalini awakening has no side effects other than pure joy, pure knowledge and pure love.Fatehji (talk) 13:42, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
- The problem with the logic you present is multi-fold. The problem I see today is any pseudoscientist can write a book making some obscure claims. Then an uneducated person can pick this up and read it, and believe it without having the opposite side of the story, or having the experience themselves and thus end up spreading negative beliefs widely with no reference for how obscure they are. You even say yourself a few times you "believe" it to be wide spread. But those books do not offer that, and as such, you should not take it upon yourself to judge how important this is to other people, "as a warning" you say. Your sources are tenuous at best, the article you refernce on Wiki has been flagged for needing further verification and professional validation - which has not happened. So, I would not link to that - the source is unprofessional.Fatehji (talk) 13:42, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
- Additionally, the whole concept of linking this so called "syndrome" to the yoga itself is an error in thinking. The syndrome refers to the dormant energy in all humans="kundalini". But Kundalini Yoga is just one yoga, like Raja or Hatha, and - like all yogas - they are all exercises and meditations that work with the Kundalini energy. It is the goal of all yogas to "raise the kundalini"(awareness). So, the "syndrome" actually refers to all spiritual practices. It only happens to be coined this way because some psuedoscientist made it up. It has nothing directly to do with "Kundalini Yoga".Fatehji (talk) 00:08, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Kundalini Yoga Benefits
I am not changing your "edits" (or actually, they are not edits, rather simply you just re-post the same thing every time), because of "conflicting views". I am changing them because they are simply not relevant, poorly sourced, and do not add to the topic. It makes no sense to reference a negative single view at the top of the page when this is one small, tiny view or issue which has an unprofessional reference material source This is called undue weighting . Additionally you do not do any service to Misplaced Pages by enforcing what you have admitted to, as your "negative view of Yogi Bhajan", and I have tried to correct the negative bias out of your "edits". Plus, you do not address my points appropriately in reply to talk back discussion as to the validity of your edits, so therefore, I will continue to improve and correct them. Fatehji (talk) 15:01, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
My view of Yogi Bhajan positive for all the good things he did. Atmapuri (talk) 17:37, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
You are continuing to misunderstand what this Encyclopedia is about and how to edit properly, as well as the purpose and scope of references. You have changed back AGAIN, for perhaps the 12th time to the EXACT same sentence which I have rebuffed over and over again in discussions and comments. You are clearly not interested in reaching a consensus with me on this matter. I have shown again and again why your edit was changed, and have added to it, and helped shape it into a better description. You seem to think that once a "reference" is created, it cannot be changed. Sorry, but this is not helping the editing process and reaching a consensus to make an article more legitimate and clear. A reference doesn't mean once you reference something that other editors cannot add onto it to clarify or expand to your edits if it adds to an understanding of the topic. Clearly you have not read the citation and source guides on Misplaced Pages. Please read and study this before you make any more changes. You need to read these: and and --Fatehji (talk) 18:59, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
- The main problem is you started this and you tried to remove and water down problems related to the certain practices of Kundalini Yoga. Edits can be expanded, but not in conflict with the meaning in the reference. You can not say, water is pure and dirty at the same time. We can reach a consensus, if you agree to include the reference to "mental damage" and link "Kundalini Syndrome" in the beginning of the article. You have to understand that the paragraph you are attacking, is a rather mild version from the original source and already very much adapted. The point is that traditional Hinduism obviously does not agree with Yogi Bhajan's teachings, at least as you presented them, and that we have to find a way to include both views. There is no consensus possible in the sense of presenting only one combined viewpoint, because the differences are too big. The Wiki references you mention apply to you the same way as they apply to me. All the sources in the paragraph are verifiable and reliable in the context of the subject of this article. If you agree, I can also include direct quotes from the book's.Atmapuri (talk) 20:11, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Atma, I am not attacking your "references" nor am I trying to water anything down. In fact, the main dispute is over that I am trying to correct what you have hyped up. I don't understand why you propose this view, but it's not relevant to Kundalini yoga as a primary concern. You may disagree, so I have posted additional references to show that this view is not definitive by any means. I am adding to the paragraph with other references from Hindu teachers - on the same par as your reference's source. You have no right to strike one teachers down, while you revert to solely your own teachers views.
So this is not by any means as you claim "in conflict with the meaning in reference". It's a new source that expands upon it and offers a different view. You make it sound and (from your actions) appear like once you have added a source, that that is the final word, and no other sources can refute or add to this claim. Perhaps then you should consider that the entire argument, if it is debatable should not be posted right up in the front of the page, but moved down to its own section. Only DUE legitimate claims should be presented in the article as a whole, but certainly in the top of the page, it's essential to provide a due weighted neutral view that can be agreed upon. But for some reason, you don't want to hear any different view, so you removed my references 5 times in one day to the exact same edit you have been running since Jan 18th - over a week ago. Your history shows you don't seem interested in compromise or consensus. This should get you blocked and it also got the page blocked. Now what will you do? We're supposed to work this out by Feb 3rd, and you haven't changed one inch since Jan 18th. Actually, I'd rather get a third party to look at it. Until you can demonstrate change, I believe you've exhausted your range of input into this topic.--Fatehji (talk) 21:20, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Request for verification and clean up of disputed content
This template must be substituted. Hi guys. Thanks for all your great work. It's really appreciated.
Sorry to bring this to your doorstep, but I have an ongoing dispute situation with a user Atmapuri over the content presented at the top of the Kundalini Yoga page. Needless to say we got carried away and the page is now blocked until Feb 3rd. My main gripe with this editor is that is an edit warrior - he has done so in his past, and he has not demonstrated an ability of working towards consensus or how to properly reference and edit sentences or concepts. He has reverted numerous edits to his same exact edits, and I have reported him for making 12 or more identical reversions in 8 days (5 of which were today). Additionally, his single point of reference material is primary source.
The big issue for now is that the editor in question is determined to link "kundalini yoga" with "kundalini syndrome". The second point is that he would like to link practice of the form with "permanent mental damage". It's bad enough that he wants to keep this reference up top, but it's also a complete error in linking the two together. "kundalini syndrome" refers to kundalini energy, and not to the yoga form. Check the page yourself. Even the "kundliani syndrome" page as a whole is marked as unprofessional (needing professional validation). Basically, he is giving this form of yoga a bad name, while referencing and citing material that is tenuous at best. And when I have added in material to refute this, or offer an alternative view, he has straight up deleted my references and citations, while commenting "If you want to change something add your own text and reference." Needless to say, it's been difficult.
My request is, can you give a third party review of this and establish that, on the grounds that "Kundalini Syndrome" refers to a spiritual energy source that can be "spontaneously generated", or "awoken" through any number of spiritual practices, it therefore has no definitive linking with any one style of Yoga. And as such, I propose that:
- A) Kundalini Yoga is not linked to "Kundalini Syndrome" in word or reference.
- B) Since "Kundalini Syndrome" itself in a non-professional term with dubious scientific value or validation, that it not be considered a valid reference source (internally) for topics of this nature (otherwise all yoga forms, Qi Gong, and martial arts would also need this "warning").
- C) That "Kundalini Syndrome" is only speaking about Kundalini energy, and not directly with the Yoga form by the same name.
- D) And finally, strike all references to "Kundalini Syndrome" from the Kundalini Yoga pages under the fact that it is misleading, negative and erroneous.
- E) Additionally, his use of a primary source material for a reference to the practice of the style leading to "permanent brain damage" is from an unscientific and opinion based source, and unreliable because the author would have a conflict of interest, in that his business as a teacher might suffer if people were to go to learn yoga from a source not lead by a "master yogi". Many sources, such as the ones I have added numerous times show that Kundalini Yoga is completely safe, very healing, and can even used for curing mental conditions (not causing them) when practiced correctly by oneself, or under a master teacher.
Thanks for your attention to this matter, it will be really helpful to have a 3rd party review from a knowledgeable source.
--Fatehji (talk) 21:46, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
References
- Swami Sivananda Radha, Kundalini Yoga for the West, timeless, 2004, pages 13, 15, 23
- David Shannahoff-Khalsa, Kundalini Yoga Meditation for Complex Psychiatric Disorders: Techniques Specific for Treating the Psychoses, Personality, and Pervasive Development Disorders, 2010
- David Shannahoff-Khalsa, Kundalini Yoga Meditation: Techniques Specific for Psychiatric Disorders, Couples Therapy, and Personal Growth, 2007
- Congressional Honorary Resolution 521 US Library of Congress