Talk:Kundalini yoga

Module:WikiProject banner/doc
This page is a soft redirect.

/Archive 1 /Archive 2

Yogi Bhajan inclusion valid on topic of Kundalini Yoga

The argument (see "[Improving this article]") that Kundalini Yoga page should not include Yogi Bhajan is unprecedented. Gatoclass is using diversion to make his argument by comparing changes to Kundalini Yoga to changes on the meditation page. This is not an umbrella category such as the yoga page; this is the Kundalini Yoga page, and Yogi Bhajans' vast contributions to Kundalini as a form of Yoga are irrefutable. He brought such an extensive breath of knowledge on the subject to the public - over 500 books and references on the subject, 10,000 exercises and meditations, 8,000 lectures over 35 years, and additional studies in many, many more related health fields. Yogi Bhajan was the founder of Kundalini Yoga as Taught by Yogi Bhajan, directly related to Kundalini Yoga, and his legacy includes a lifetimes of work on the subject of Kundalini Yoga. As a Master of Kundalini Yoga, he was recognized by the US Government in a unanimously passed Joint Congressional Resolution for his contributions to US society and his teachings ([[1]] Senate Honorary Resolution 148, US Library of Congress). His break with the secrecy surrounding Kundalini Yoga was taken at great personal sacrifice which he undertook in 1968 to bring this style to the United States and train teachers worldwide, which is well documented in numerous publications and articles (see Yogi Bhajan page). He founded organizations in the early 1970s - [3HO] and the [Kundalini Research Institute] - which are maintained by over 30 centers across the globe, serve the global community, connect teachers, schedule yogic events, and oversee the publications and developments relating to Kundalini Yoga. He developed a systematic training system, text books and three levels of teacher training related to Kundalini Yoga [[2]] - under which thousands of teachers have been trained. Ignoring his contributions to the field would be akin to a page on Psychotherapy and Psychoanalysis ignoring the contributions of Freud. Based on his contributions and the following examples, it is believed that continual removal of this information amounts to [Tendentious Editing]. --Fatehji (talk) 16:53, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

As an example of influential, founding, popular and ground-breaking teachers included prominently on other yoga pages, please look at the following pages:

• Hatha Yoga: "Hatha Yoga ... is a system of Yoga introduced by Yogi Swatmarama"

Many modern schools of Hatha Yoga derive from the school of Sri Tirumalai Krishnamacharya, who taught from 1924 until his death in 1989. Among his students prominent in popularizing Yoga in the West were Sri K. Pattabhi Jois, famous for popularizing the vigorous Ashtanga Vinyasa Yoga style, B.K.S. Iyengar who emphasizes alignment and the use of props, Indra Devi and Krishnamacharya's son T.K.V. Desikachar who developed the Viniyoga style. Desikachar founded the Krishnamacharya Yoga Mandiram in Chennai, with the aim of making available the heritage of yoga as taught by Krishnamacharya.

Another major stream of influence was Swami Sivananda of Rishikesh (1887-1963) and his many disciples, including Swami Vishnu-devananda - founder of International Sivananda Yoga Vedanta Centres, Swami Satyananda - of the Bihar School of Yoga, Swami Satchidananda - of Integral Yoga, Swami Sivananda Radha - founder of Yasodhara Ashram, Yoga Retreat & Study centre, among others.

• Kriya Yoga: "Kriya Yoga is described by its practitioners as the ancient Yoga system revived in modern times by Mahavatar Babaji through his disciple Lahiri Mahasaya, c 1861, and brought into popular awareness through Paramhansa Yogananda's book Autobiography of a Yogi."

Kriya Yoga, as taught by Lahiri Mahasaya, is traditionally learned via the Guru-disciple relationship. He recounted that after his initiation into Kriya Yoga, "Babaji instructed me in the ancient rigid rules which govern the transmission of the yogic art from Guru to disciple." (primary source)

• Ashtanga Yoga: "Ashtanga Vinyasa Yoga is an ancient system of yoga popularized by K. Pattabhi Jois. Pattabhi Jois began his yoga studies in 1927 at the age of 12, and by 1948 had established an institute for teaching the specific yoga practice known as Ashtanga (Sanskrit for "eight-limbed") Yoga."

The Ashtanga Vinyasa series is said to have its origin in an ancient text called the Yoga Korunta, compiled by Vamana Rishi, which Krishnamacharya received from his Guru Rama Mohan Brahmachari at Mount Kailash in the early 20th century.

Krishnamacharya has had considerable influence on many of the modern forms of yoga taught today. Among his students were many notable present-day teachers such as K. Pattabhi Jois, B.K.S. Iyengar, Indra Devi, and Krishnamacharya's son T.K.V. Desikachar.

--Fatehji (talk) 16:53, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

These are not exactly analogous to the situation here. Hatha Yoga is a broad system of yoga apparently originating in the 15th century. Today, there are countless schools teaching various forms of Hatha Yoga. Kriya Yoga appears to be a specific school of yoga developed through one particular lineage. There are not AFAIK multiple schools of Kriya Yoga. And the article you quote re Ashtanga Yoga is actually the Ashtanga Vinyasa Yoga article which again is an article about a specific school of Yoga. The latter two articles are more analogous to the Kundalini Yoga as Taught by Yogi Bhajan article.

This particular article is about kundalini yoga, which is more like hatha yoga in the sense that forms of it are practiced by many different schools. The common factor is that they are schools and practices specifically focussed on awakening and maintaining the kundalini, whereas some other schools of yoga may only refer to the kundalini obliquely. This article is currently a bit of a mess and its focus is unclear, but arguably it should be trying to say something about what distinguishes kundalini yoga from other schools of yoga. What the article shouldn't be is a coatrack for particular schools of kundalini yoga, we already have articles on individual schools and referencing them here is I think likely to cause problems. Gatoclass (talk) 08:02, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Of course these examples are valid and analogous, because they demonstrate how prominent figures in the development of a style, and those important in the historical lineage of a style are valid ground for inclusion.

The claim (mind you, without any references) by Gatoclass that "Kundalini is like Hatha in that is practiced by many different schools" is neither accurate nor true. Before Yogi Bhajan systematized Kundalini yoga into a style that is practiced globally, it did not exist widely in any public school or teaching structure. The correct statement would be:

Kundalini yoga is practiced by very few schools and it a fairly small part of the scope of the entire yoga world. However, raising of kundalini energy is the end result of all schools of yoga, including Hatha. It is particularly studied closely, and named after this form of energy in the system of Kundalini Yoga, of which Yogi Bhajan was the Master teacher and modern founder.

Hatha actually comes from the sutras of Patanjali. Yoga also is written about in the Upanishads and Vedic texts which date back to 1500–1000 BCE. It may have been repackaged, and retaught, and renamed, and called "Ha" "Tha" by Yogi Swatmarama in the 1400's but it is still yoga. The same goes for Kundalini Yoga - and the analogy is very simple: The core teachings will always remain true to Patanjali, but just like as the core founding of Hatha can be traced back to the Hatha Yoga Pradipika written by Svami Svatmarama, so can the core founding of Kundalini Yoga be traced back to Yogi Bhajans' teachings.

Kundalini yoga is very similar to Hatha in the sense that it combines many different practices -- but because it evolves from the highest levels of yoga, it was not widely taught, differed from teacher to teacher, and didn't really have a clearly formal system -- partially due to the fact that it was considered so secret and only passed onto those who proved high-level accomplishment. Yogi Bhajan was one such student (who mastered it at age 16), and who then changed and challenged all of this past history. He drew together all the teachings from seers and sages and from India, brought them to the West and developed them into the style of yoga that is recognized and practiced all over the world as Kundalini Yoga. He basically took something that was a conceptual high-level ephemeral mix of many styles and practices, and developed/revealed it into a systematized school of yoga. Unless you can prove otherwise and demonstrate that another system or school where it is taught widely and spread publicly, you have to assume good faith that Yogi Bhajan is the major and historically singular valid figure in spreading Kundalini Yoga as it is known today to the global consciousness.

If one wanted to make this article better, just look at the Hatha page... On the Hatha Page, there is an origins section which states: [3]

The most comprehensive text of Hatha Yoga is the Hatha Yoga Pradipika by Yogi Swatmarama. This work is nonetheless derived from older Sanskrit texts on Yoga besides Yogi Swatmarama's own yogic experiences. It includes information about shatkarma (purification), asana (postures), pranayama (subtle energy control), chakras (centers of energy), kundalini (instinct), bandhas (muscle force), kriyas (techniques; manifestations of kundalini), shakti (sacred force), nadis (channels), and mudras (symbolic gestures) among other topics.

You could literally say the exact same thing about Kundalini Yoga and just copy-replace "Yogi Sawtmarama" with "Yogi Bhajan", and you would have 90% of the origin of Kundalini Yoga covered, as well as 80% of the style defined. The only notable difference is that what Yogi Bhajan did for Kundalini Yoga in 1968, and the other guy did for Hatha in the 1400's.

Someone else give me an honest neutral 3O opinion here!--Fatehji (talk) 20:56, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

This is a good story about Yogi Bhajan's early days under his teacher. May help you understand him a bit more of his sacrifices as a yoga teacher. My Teacher's Teacher - Aquarian Times, 2005--Fatehji (talk) 09:17, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

I am the Third Opinion Wikipedian who issued the Third Opinion set out above on this page. I have removed the {{3O}} tag from this section. Posting the {{3O}} tag does not make a Third Opinion request; please read the text of the tag and see the more detailed explanation and suggestions here. Please do not replace the template until you make a request at the Third Opinion project page. — TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 17:06, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

I believe it would really help to simplify things if some people just a did like 2 second of research before posting. For example, please cite this About.com article on Kundalini Yoga: [4] - Very first paragraph mentions Yogi Bhajan. This article is Medical Board Reviewed and updated as recently as April 11th, 2010.--66.65.62.138 (talk) 00:24, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Discussing the Ancient History of Kundalini Yoga

Opening up to legitimate sourced and verifiable citations covering the early development of Kundalini yoga. Need more info.--Fatehji (talk) 19:50, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Kundalini Yoga appears to be a difficult topic to historically discuss. Many mentions are made of using a variety of yogas whose aim was to facilitate raising kundalini as an energy force within the body [[5]], and kundalini energy raising has been the subject and legitimate end result on the path towards self-realization and enlightenment . However, very little mention can be found of an existing system of "Kundalini Yoga", before the teachings Yogi Bhajan were introduced in 1968. Some books mention it here and there, or offer a "brief study" [[6]], and some teachers offer one-off book or guide that outline a style similar to Raja Yoga, with self-exploratory mental thought exercises being the predominant instruction [[7]], however, as a complete system and school, before Yogi Bhajan laid down the basis of 500+ books and a cohesive system of 10,000+ exercises and meditations (by integrating all of the benefits of Laya, Tantra, Astanga, Raja, Hatha, Bakti, Shakti, and Kriya Yogas and even Eastern-Asian practices), very few examples of "Kundalini+Yoga" exists in my research. Mentions only to Kundalini (again, as energy) are alluded to in the oldest surviving text on Hatha Yoga, The Hath Yoga Pradipika Yoga by Swami Swatmarama, a disciple of Swami Goraknath, who wrote the text in the 15th century CE drawing upon previous texts and his own experiences.--Fatehji (talk) 18:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

The problem is that there is little if any independent verification of these claims, many of which are of an exceptional nature. There is no verification that Yogi Bhajan was himself a "master" of kundalini yoga, apart from his own testimony. You are claiming he was the first to teach a "comprehensive" system of kundalini yoga, but the kundalini and methods for awakening it have been known about and taught for thousands of years, how likely is it that no teacher before him has taught a comprehensive method?

We cannot base encyclopedic content on unverified or unverifiable claims. A claim can be reported, but it can't be treated as if it were an established fact. Nor can article content be weighted on the basis of such claims. Gatoclass (talk) 11:32, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't see how "likelyness" has ever been raison d'etre of whether something has happened. How "likely" was it that 100,000 million years of evolution happened reach a point to create someone like you? And who's "we" -- are you qualified to refer to yourself as a position of authority or representing more than one person?--Fatehji (talk) 07:01, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't see how "likelyness" has ever been raison d'etre of whether something has happened.

Yes, lots of unlikely things happen. However, per WP:REDFLAG, exceptional claims require exceptional sources. Claiming that someone only recently developed the first "complete system" for a process that has been known about and taught for thousands of years is obviously an exceptional claim requiring exceptional sources, for which none have been provided. Yogi Bhajan's methodology AFAICT is not even accepted by mainstream Sikhs. You personally may be convinced that Yogi Bhajan was the first to ever develop a complete system of kundalini yoga, and you are entitled to your personal view, but you are not entitled to present information in this encyclopedia based upon your personal views or upon the views of a particular organization. Gatoclass (talk) 11:11, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Again, you have to provide sources for your claims. YOUR claim is exceptional that there is a "a process that has been known about and taught for thousands of years". Known by whom? Taught for how long? Taught by whom? Not accepted by whom? What is a mainstream Sikh have anything to do with yoga? Your denials -- as usual -- raise more questions about your 'stories' than anything else. Where do you get your ideas from? Why don't you do a little research first and see that yes... Yogi Bhajan is the main teacher and the first to popularize a safe and complete methodology of Kundalini yoga. Please try to contain yourself from being a fact twisting denier and do a little research first before you post wild claims.--66.65.62.138 (talk) 12:43, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Kundalini Yoga is not a subdivision of Hatha Yoga

---

Please correct this and I will suggest as a Kundalini Yoga practicant and soon to be teacher, to refer to the www.KRI.org whose primary mission is to maintain the teachings and integrity of this ancient technology.

Kundalini Yoga is NOT a subdivision of hatha this is completely misunderstood and wrong. Kundalini yoga is the most complete technology embracing: pranayama, asanas, mudras, mantras, etc, therefore many types of yoga.. it is represented as a diamond, has many cuts, each cut is a type of yoga, but the diamond itself is kundalini yoga.

I find it fair and necessary to inform the people what it REALLY is and not create so much confusion in what it has to offer.. Remember is about experimentation, so if this si not propossed, we understand it was not experienced by someone who is writing it.

Sat Nam

201.230.249.233 (talk) 18:03, 10 March 2010 (UTC)levtar kaur201.230.249.233 (talk) 18:03, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Kundalini Yoga is a complete system of yoga that contains: pranayama, asanas, mudras, mantras (and more, etc...). Kundalini Yoga blends specific timed movements, kriyas, breathing, meditations with mantra, and mind yoga, into an experience of yoga as a spiritual science that differs from traditional Hatha Yoga. Each set of exercises and meditations are designed for a specific purpose and healing capacity -- and applied through consistent sadhana practice to ease transformation, increase individual awareness, improve group awareness, and elevate human consciousness.

Would that would be a more correct, clear and also educational clarification?--Fatehji (talk) 06:46, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

No, because it's still presenting kundalini yoga from the POV of the 3HO movement. Gatoclass (talk) 11:14, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

How so? This comes from multiple sources. To refute it you have to provide some alternative sources, you can't just say "no". I have plenty of experience with this style of Yoga, including research of it, reading about it, study of it (from many different view points and books), as well as years of experience and study of many other styles of Yoga. What experience have you? Where is your proof that this style has been practiced for many "1000's of years" in a way that makes it different than described above? This article is confusing and misleading, and totally out of line with other pages on Yoga... Unless you can provide valid alternative descriptions with referenced proofs -- no one can validate any of your refutations. This information is widely available and reference-able if you only look.

It makes little sense to just refute without proof and keep the status quo... and it's worse when done from a standpoint that is uninformed and not interested in advancing the article. It appears Gatoclass has been asked personally at least a few dozen times for proofs and references yet has provided none! Kundalini Yoga is mainstream, and it is openly taught all over the world. Just because one doesn't believe in it ((only one opinion, it seems)), doesn't make the refutations relevant. Millions of vegetarians don't "believe" in eating meat -- that doesn't mean one has to refute meat eating on every chicken, beef and pork page.

Kundalini Yoga, meaning yoga of awareness, is a complete system of integrative yoga which contains: pranayama, asanas, mudras, mantras and meditation that are all combined to raise self-awareness, power, and consciousness - and ultimately self-enlightenment ((taken from several different sources - many references already provided previously)). Traditionally an advanced level of yoga, it was revealed to students one a certain level of self-mastery was attained, and therefore practiced in relative secrecy for many years ((based on history, readings and stories from many teachers, sources have been and will be provided)). This began to change in the 1900's when interest in yoga began to grow and word of kundalini energy was translated and spread in some writings ((ie. Sir John Woodruffs translation of the kundalini energy writings -- please note he did not teach yoga!)). Most notably, in 1968 Yogi Bhajan broke with centuries of tradition and openly began teaching teachers in the West Kundalini Yoga as a public practice and householders yoga, openly providing the experience of the powerful healing properties of the system to the world. ((Not a POV - this is statement of fact, multiple references provided in past.)). Kundalini yoga has now gained worldwide popularity, and is taught globally in many centers ((also fact)).

Kundalini Yoga blends together kriyas that work deeply on the physical body with breath control, meditations with mantra, focus on chakras, control of raising of kundalini energy, and mind yoga Raj Yoga, into an experience of yoga as a technology and spiritual science that differs from traditional branch of Hatha Yoga ((this is true, kundalini yoga is very different than traditional hatha in many respects)). Each set of exercises and meditations are designed for a specific purpose and healing capacity -- which are traditionally applied through consistent sadhana practice to initiate deeper personal transformations, heighten individual awareness, increase group awareness, and elevate human consciousness.

That's a well written and reference-able opener, with historical facts, and also more in line with other yoga pages (i.e. hatha, ashtanga) and in line with several 3rd opinions shown on this talk page. As requested by Wiki, this is a bold change, and cleans up much of the confusion in this article.

After this opener, it would be helpful to have other teacher's views on Kundalini Yoga, as well as some of the information on kundalini energy and how it applies to kundalini yoga. However, just equating kundalini energy with kundalini yoga is very misleading because 1) Kundalini yoga is complete system of yoga build upon Raja yoga, first and foremost, and secondly, 2) kundalini energy is something that can be raised and controlled spontaneously, or through many different practices. In fact, it is little-known that Buddhist monks have their own methods of Kundalini yoga that are practiced at very high levels.--66.65.62.138 (talk) 13:57, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

No, sorry, that opener is not acceptable at all. It presents kundalini yoga as presented by Yogi Bhajan. That's not what this article is about, we already have a kundalini yoga as taught by Yogi Bhajan article. Gatoclass (talk) 14:38, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Dude... How does it do THAT? You are just blatantly twisted. And in either case, what gives you the idea that there is any difference? I've shown many sources. Sikh Yoga, Hindi Yoga, Backwards Yoga, it's all the same yoga. Stop trying to identify what Yogi Bhajan revealed as any different than what it is. Check the hatha page. The first sentence talks about who popularized Hatha yoga. Fact. Same thing with Kundalini Yoga. Fact. It's all Kundalini Yoga. Fact. There's no difference. Fact. End of story. If you seem to know some great mystery that shows otherwise, show it, give proof. Or just get lost and go back to your Marine Ship Yard pages, or whatever it is you have knowledge in. Your opinion here is invalid. You haven't done one ounce of research. Don't post back here until you can contribute something of value.--66.65.62.138 (talk) 02:04, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Kundalini Yoga and physiological "syndromes"

The section [8] within Kundalini yoga with regards to Kundalini syndrome is questionable and in the context of this article needs clarification. There is still absolutely no medical citation backing up any of the physiological claims -- can one find references to "Kundalini syndrome" in a medical textbook? All of the claims are being made by psychologists, not physicians. This could be called quackery unless it can be put into a more relevant context.--66.65.62.138 (talk) 13:18, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

In our article, one of the references cited for 'Kundalini syndrome' is a 1995 paper by Robert Turner et al. in the Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease. This is a scholarly journal of psychopathology that began publication in 1874. The Turner article (1995) explains why a new category was added to the DSM-IV for this class of problem. Per WP:MEDRS, we are to trust what reliable sources have published in peer-reviewed journals. If you know of any more recent peer-reviewed publication that contradicts the findings of Turner et al, please offer it for discussion here. Also, it would be a novel opinion to argue that DSM-IV represents quackery since psychologists contribute to it. EdJohnston (talk) 13:45, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

It would seem the above point was attempting to state that this is a page on Yoga, which is a physical discipline, and it could be ambiguous and misleading to quote citations from psychiatric journals discussing Kundalini energy in other forms. It's not that the journal is not peer-reviewed, it's whether it has any relevance on this page about Yoga. This "caution" probably belongs on the kundalini page rather than here -- or most likely, it seems it was previously copied from that page to here by someone who doesn't understand the difference between Yoga and psychology. I would agree I don't see how near death studies and transpersonal psychology is a good source for commenting on yoga. Additionally on review of these articles, there's nothing specifically in them that states the improper use of kundalini yoga (physical) can cause Kundalini syndrome (psycho-pathological). I would suggest this section be improved as it is misleading.

In typical and classic yogic thinking Kundalini represents the dormant creative energy of potential in all things, and more often than not is responsible for the flowering of awareness and compassion in a person who is taking yoga. It should be questioned (in the cited study) how this "energy" is being raised... If it's not specifically through Kundalini Yoga or a study of Yogis (and it doesn't seem that this is explicitly stated) then it probably doesn't belong here. There are already pages on Kundalini syndrome and Kundalini energy where this information is stored.

IMO these are cultural and fringe pathology studies being introduced in an inappropriate setting, and also has some undue weight on this page in terms of it's depth of detail. I'd prefer to hear from yoga teachers on this page, not fringe psychologists. Also, it needs to be qualified somewhere exactly how many people are "suffering" from such things in perspective of how many people benefit from the practice yoga each day. I can't find a quantification that this is as big a number as the amount of people who sprain their ankles or strain their shoulders. So, why is there no warning on that? The Undue weight principle should be considered.--69.38.133.202 (talk) 19:28, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Additionally, no reference to "Kundalini" nor "kundalini syndrome" could be found at Psychiatry Online.com. It should be checked to see if this one paper from 1995 has any current standing in 2010. The DSM journal is often updated, and often removes disorders and frequently changes them. If this syndrome has any standing, it should probably have been corroborated in the last 15 years by at least a few other studies.--69.38.133.202 (talk) 19:38, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Kundalini syndrome is referenced in plenty of reliable sources. Apart from which, there is probably no more medical evidence for the kundalini per se than there is for kundalini syndrome, so your point is rather moot. Gatoclass (talk) 08:43, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Which "plenty of sources"??...

1) Provide sources! To just say "plenty of sources" is meaningless. "Plenty" is not a prerequisite for inclusion on Wikipedia. Context is only important.

So, you force me to do the research for you:

A search in the PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine and National Institutes of Health [9] turned up "0" results for Kundalini syndrome.

A further search at the NCBI National Center for Biotechnology Information [10] turned up a scant "3" results.

Of these 3, one referred to "Kundalini experience" in very brief relationship to a paragraph on "mystery syndromes", which on further examination was referenced from a harmless study on muscle relaxation of yogi practitioners. The other referred to Kundalini yoga as a therapeutic practice for relieving Cerebral-Fluid Stasis (i.e. - it was a reference to the benefits of Kundalini yoga, with no mention of any syndrome).

Shall I continue? How about "0" results at WebMD for "kundalini syndrome".

A thin amount of "plenty" for any continuing mention of "Kundalini syndrome" in relationship to Kundalini yoga according to reputable sources of modern medicine.

2) Then, the best part is when you say "no more medical evidence for the kundalini per se than there is for kundalini syndrome". Duh! Perhaps this is the one thing you have said in all of your arguments that is true -- because you finally agree with me. But that doesn't make MY point moot. It makes YOUR point moot. My point all along has been "Kundalini mystery syndrome" should not be included on this article of Kundalini yoga at all because it has no back-up of evidence or critical mass of any sufficient modern medical support at all. Claiming that is has "no medical evidence" doesn't make a case for its inclusion -- Dooohhh!--66.65.62.138 (talk) 00:18, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

I would agree with the user (66.65.62.138) in some respects, although not in tone, that there is undue weight given to the 'cautionary observations' section. The section appears patchwork, and the cited sources come from several fields of expertise that do not relate directly to this article. Verification with the most recent version of the DSM Journal of any relationship of Kundalini yoga and stated syndrome would be a viable source, but if not, this section should be modified to reflect that.WilliamExeter (talk) 16:21, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

How WP:UNDUE applies to the inclusion of medical studies... or not.

To say that some viewpoints on Kundalini are fringe or minority viewpoints implies that there is a majority or official understanding of the subject - but this is untrue. Kundalini is an unexplored area and western literature is still in the process of understanding it. These medical studies are not proposing wildly unusual theories of the subject akin to the flat earth theory (see WP:UNDUE). They are medical studies into the effects of kundalini yoga and that makes them relevant. To not include them is denying information to the reader. There is no dispute going on in the western literature against these medical studies so we are not giving them undue weight. A medical study is an enquiry, not a viewpoint. Freelion (talk) 03:27, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Look, you are perfectly welcome to include your study in the Sahaja Yoga article, where it belongs. It's too trivial a study to be included here, and its in-house nature also precludes it. Gatoclass (talk) 11:07, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Inhouse, where does it say that? Freelion (talk) 01:36, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

It was run by Sahaja Yogis, it was not independent. Gatoclass (talk) 13:07, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

I would tend to agree that this study is of such a small, minuscule nature in comparison to the beneficial results being brought about by widespread meditation and Kundalini practice, that is is totally negligible. I'm not even sure how Sahaja Yoga and Kundalini yoga relate. However, that does not solve the problem the Gatoclass is attempting to rule this page through his opinion alone, and without any background research as to the modern development of Kundalini yoga. His opinion is wrecking this article, and I would suggest he stick to topics in which he has a willingness to open himself to learning and compromise, or sequester himself to the editing of other articles not related to spirituality and yoga. His one-pointed and uncompromising opinion is creating hardships for other editors. His stories are rarely if ever based on a referenced source. And consistently his comments are based on disinformation and hearsay. 66.65.62.138 (talk) 19:39, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Mostly, Gatoclass has honed his use of the "rules" of Wikipedia to bend and twist the editing of other editors so that his meekly - if at all - researched point of view may be expressed without the appearance of conflicting opinion. It's very transparent, and I would ask that he kindly find other way to express his insecurities. Ironically, the ideal application for his energies to help him with healing his inner wounds would be directing himself towards the study and practice of Kundalini Yoga. Maybe that's really his purpose for being here.Fatehji (talk) 19:57, 9 July 2010 (UTC)