Talk:Kundalini syndrome

top

This article is a "copy and paste" from the article on Kundalini. It can therefore not be considered to be original material. Also, it is a "copy and paste" of an old edit of the Kundalini article material, and not the current edit. The phenomenon called Kundalini syndrome is already discussed in the article on Kundalini. I am therefore substituting the "copy-pasted" material with a shorter edit. --80.239.22.238 17:50, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

The current edit from the Kundalini article has been moved here and the Kundalini syndrome section has been stubified. --Calibas 17:49, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

ye sit is? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smith Jones (talk • contribs) 03:56, August 24, 2007 (UTC)

This article has lost many of the original references (in the reference section) during the move (June 30, 2007) from the Kundalini-article. Many of the notes, which earlier corresponded to references, is no longer supported by a reference. This is a problem for the article. --129.241.71.175 (talk) 10:07, 12 April 2008 (UTC) Bold text

Citation tags

I removed a couple of the tags, if you have a problem with this page either add {{Fact}} tags to the specific part or tell us why on the talk page. Calibas 04:00, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Writers ending with "-on"

Most of the article is built upon the studies by three men Greyson, Kason and Scotton. More sources are needed, otherwise the article should specify that the theory of "Kundalini Syndrome" is attributed primarily to these authors, perhaps even splitting the article into sections for each author's opinion on the subject. Sfacets 04:09, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Physio-Kundalini syndrome - Kundalini-experience/awakening

First let me say there is nothing wrong with the inclusion of "side effects" in this article. Although acolytes of Kundalini Yoga believe powerful supernatural forces cause the mental problems associated with this Yoga form they correctly record psychiatric outcomes of this exposure. Prana is essentially a belief in magic. There are no powerful supernatural forces.

Didn't you already suspect that waving your arms and legs about while performing Yoga poses in exercise groups didn't call up miracle cures.

My five year website psychology project argues that by simple observation you can correlate the serious mental problems to a little known phenomenon of human physiology, which caused mental breaks in unprotected business offices.

This is not welcomed information. It discloses that the elaborate Kundalini belief system is cultural invention to explain the psychiatric symptoms Subliminal Distraction exposure causes. This was developed over more than 5000 years.

Information about the problem with physiology appears in first semester college level psychology courses under psychophysics. I don't have a citation for you. Someone who teaches this level psychology course should be able to supply that.

Another source of this information would be those who teach Design as it relates to "Systems Furniture."

There are no citations or references in mental health or medicine for this problem. Those disciplines are unaware of this phenomenon or that mental breaks ever happened in business offices caused by repeated triggering of the vision startle reflex.

There should be little reference to "mental disorders" of the DSM. Those are names given to observed behaviors and change at the whim of the voting membership of the American Psychiatric Association. The DSM freely admits that there is no knowledge of causation for them.

VisionAndPsychosis.Net is a collection of links and articles about Subliminal Distraction, the name of the phenomenon outside the United States. Here the phrase 'Cubicle Level Protection' identifies it. Information will be posted on the Kundalini Yoga Psychotic Episode page as the site is updated. You are welcomed to use that information as it is posted.

Although my site has copyright you may use information with proper citation

L K Tucker 69.1.46.140 (talk) 04:50, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Interesting OR, but how does subliminal visual distraction apply to those who seek and find kundalini sensations at home, in an empty room, with their eyes shut? I'm not convinced it does. K2709 (talk) 20:56, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

IMO that is the weirdest and most disjointed train of logic (BS) I've heard on this subject in a while.66.65.62.138 (talk) 18:59, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Psychosomoatic

"This psychosomatic arousal and excitation is believed to occur in connection with prolonged, intensive spiritual or contemplative practice, such as meditation or yoga[10] [11] [12], or a near-death experience [13] [14], or as a result of an intense personal crisis or experience."

Is this asserting that kundalini syndrome is purely psychosomatic?--71.198.176.133 (talk) 04:26, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Kundalini Syndrome- experiences

I find this article highly well studied and documented , however it takes the pure angle from psychiatry and is not written through actual experience of those who practice forms of kundalini stimulation and may have experienced the syndrome itself. Like someone writing profusely on the theory of headaches without ever actually having one...and deciding thus that headaches are not real!

Although I did attempt to insert references of a highly respected teacher with over 50,000 students worldwide, it sees the comments were soon removed. This only demonstrates to me the lack of willingness to consider both sides of the story.

Though the school I refer to is Reiki Tummo as taught by Irmansyah Effendi of Indonesia. Other Yoga groups such as Sahaja Yoga also practice aspects of awakening kundalini as well as the Kundalini yoga traditions as depicted in the main article. The purpose in introducing Effendis system was purely to provide an avenue of help to anyone suffering this affliction and allowing those in pain the choice to seek help where medicine will disclaim it forthright.(GDL) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.246.20.172 (talk) 13:20, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Greetings - I noticed that your reference was removed, and it appears that the person who removed it does not have a neutral point of view (NPOV) given the comments in the history section. This article needs a fair amount of rewriting, as it is difficult to read. I saw your reference, and (before it was deleted) believed that perhaps a new section specifically for places that people can go to in order to receive assistance should be created to list such organizations. I do not have the time to do so at the moment, though I have been a technical writer/editor for the past 25+ years and would like to give this article a thorough restructuring. It may be a little while yet, though I will be sure to research your suggestion that Reiki Tummo would indeed be of assistance to people who are experiencing this situation. I have known many of the kundalini researchers personally - including Dr. Lee Sannella when he was alive - and agree with you that more needs to be added to this article. Of course, you are always welcome to add it in again anytime, and I would suggest considering the format of a new heading, perhaps "Kundalini syndrome resources", with an introductory paragraph and a very brief description of the system.--Cminard (talk) 18:53, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

'Words from China'

The 'Words from China' section contains a single citation, to a source that seems mostly anecdotal; perhaps worse, most of what's written isn't talked about in the source article. It also reads like an advertisement ('Why Qigong Psychosis' sounds like a brochure title), is incredibly defensive, and doesn't really make reference to Kundalini Syndrome. The Qigong article says what this section says in fewer words and in an encyclopaedic format.

Thus, I'm going to delete this section; I feel it's misleading and, in this state, unrelated. --Marco Passarani (talk) 00:27, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Symptomatology

"dilated pupils, insomnia, intense curiousity, depressed appetite, (A personal observed experience during kundalini practice with no psychiatric diagnosis or drug use) [17]"

Which of these symptoms are supported by the Pringle (1998) ref., and which ones are from personal experience? I would suggest keeping only those symptoms which are supported by a reference. I am removing these symptoms from the text until we can establish which ones that are supported by the Pringle ref..--Hawol (talk) 16:53, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

References; Grof and Goel

Possible re-write--> According to some commentators it is not recommended to treat or suppress Kundalini symptoms with the tools of western medicine. Grof noted that suppressing kundalini's side effects with psychiatric medicine could be very unfortunate .

These suggestions, from Grof and Goel, needs to be included with a more precise citation and page reference. I'm putting them here on the talk page until we have a more elaborate referencing.--Hawol (talk) 17:51, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

References provided are false

There is some very bad news for Wikipedians. The references provided for this article were false, and henceforth, will atleast decrease my trust in cited articles. The editor had confidently cited many of his own statements, which I presume were Original Research. I would like other fellow editors to have a look at my claim.
I searched for the word "kundalini" in the book by Scotton see here and in the book by Greyson see here and the book by Grof see here and the book by Kason [see here].
It is observed that in none of the books the word 'Kundalini Syndrome' mentioned anywhere, and even if mentioned indirectly, it is actually referring to some spiritual disorders, not the fictious 'Kundalini Syndrome' disorder.
I believe the same is the case with the other books that have been cited in this article. This is a severe breach in the trust Wikipedia editors have in each other. I request for this article to be deleted immediately, which because of my neglection was existing in Wikipedia for a long time. -- Bhuto (Talk | Contribs) 14:44, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

You are mistaken as a cursory check of these sources revealed use of the term.[1][2] Of course, google searches on these books only reveal a very small part of the books' overall contents in any case, but even so it's clear that these authors are referring to a syndrome which can occur when the Kundalini awakens. Gatoclass (talk) 08:24, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

To clarify, the references you cited by Gateclass are referring only to something called "Physio-Kundalini syndrome" in a couple of instances, and so, the articles are not relative or helping to resolve this issue. They only raise more questions as to whether this is an entirely fictitious, mystical, psychosomatic, or concocted 'syndrome'. More references and citations are needed, but none have been forthcoming.--Fatehji (talk) 09:40, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

@Gatoclass - You are mistaken:

First:Google Books may reveal only a portion, but at the top (bottom of the search box) - it displays the number of pages that matches the search query (for eg. 3 pages matches "kundalini")

Second:There are two different phenomenon. Authors referring to a syndrome after Kundalini awakens, is different from Kundalini syndrome itself. The authors have NOT generated the term "Kundalini Syndrome". Infact the closest they were refering to was "Physio-Kundalini Syndrome Index", which I feel is separate from "Kundalini Syndrome".

Third:Please have a look at the article. It relies heavily on the citations. My question is, if there are only three references of "kundalini" in the book, how come the editor was able to put so much of information in the article. If it is possible for anybody to read the harcopy of these books, please leave a comment and leave a reply for Gatoclass. Bhuto (Talk | Contribs) 11:18, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Look, there is no question this is an encyclopedic topic. There are literally dozens of books mentioning the phenomenon. As for your third point, a great deal of information can be derived from only one source, and your suggestion that the author of this article has engaged in OR is no more than speculation. Gatoclass (talk) 19:15, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry but Gatoclass is once again using quantity of search results as validations for inclusion instead of direct references to research articles or examining the validity of existing sources. Needless to say, Physio-Kundalini "Syndrome" is a Culturally-Bound diagnosis. You will not find references to it on Web MD, or PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine and National Institutes of Health, or any valid mention supporting it at the NCBI National Center for Biotechnology Information. It's the sources and content that counts -- not the number of references!Fatehji (talk) 15:54, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Requested move to Kundalini syndrome

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was Moved. No counterargument for following MOS. DMacks (talk) 10:09, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Kundalini Syndrome → Kundalini syndrome — In accordance to Wikipedia's naming convention of syndromes, as in, for example, Acquired immune deficiency syndrome and Down syndrome. Dono (talk) 11:08, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Kundalini Yoga is a benign and beneficial force.

In the long-established yoga tradition, kundalini refers to the latent and unfolding human potential of self-realization. Before Dr. Kason, it has never been associated with any form of psychiatic or neurological disorders. According to the ancient teachings, kundalini is a benign and beneficial force.

Kason's book,which I have read, is in no way "anti-yoga" or "anti-kundalini yoga", but this is the impression this article has made up until my recent edits. Kason stresses that bad things do not happen when kundalini yoga is practiced under the guidance of a knowledgeable master. Quoting Dr. Kason: "...today almost everyone – regardless of their religious background or spiritual orientation – has some familiarity with and respect for yoga. Second, the descriptions of spiritually transformative energy and its workings are more detailed and accessible in yoga than they are in some other traditions. Yoga was, at its roots, a systematic and carefully outlined practice designed to stimulate kundalini in a healthy way."

For this reason, I have included rebuttals from Yogi Bhajan and, for the sake of balance added links at the end to both Dr. Kason's and Yogi Bhajan's sites. Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa (talk) 17:35, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

No, sorry, you are not going to turn this article into a free advertisement for Yogi Bhajan. If you restore this material I will move to have you blocked. Gatoclass (talk) 04:26, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

That was never my intent. Sorry if you got that impression. Transforming a scary and imbalanced account is my intent. I hope you will bear with me as I try and come up with a version you can agree to.

I am pleased that you seem to have found my addition of Dr. Kason's "Treatment" and "Signs of Healthy Spiritual Transformation" agreeable and some Kundalini references unobjectionable. However, in your haste to eliminate Yogi Bhajan's rebuttal of the scare mongering that has been out there in regards to this syndrome, you also deleted a quote of Paramhans Swami Maheshwarananda.

If Westerners want to appropriate Eastern terminology, they should allow some time for a reasoned rebuttal on behalf of the East.Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa (talk) 21:07, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

I didn't know you added the Kason account and I don't necessarily find it "unobjectionable", indeed I think it another clear violation of WP:UNDUE. My main concern is that generic articles like this are not used as platforms for the promotion of particular religious groups. I don't doubt the article as it currently stands could use some improvement but editors should as much as possible use credible, scholarly sources, not sources which clearly have something to gain from their inclusion, or which promote fringe views or views which lack corroboration from other reliable sources. Gatoclass (talk) 06:49, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for you views. Kundalini is definitely not a mainstream subject. Neither is it the domain of any religious group. Once you get into it, you are either dealing with psychotherapists (and their clients) or with practitioners of yoga. You may call yogis a fringe group, but it is certainly a growing fringe, if that. And the yoga side of this subject is not going to be represented by the Wall Street Journal or the APA's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. But there are respected and published authorities who use Kundalini Yoga as a therapeutic modality and certainly do not think of it as a syndrome. Dharma Singh KhalsaMD and David Shannahoff-Khalsa MD are a couple of these authorities that come to mind. And their teacher was Yogi Bhajan. With your indulgence and appreciating your informed perspective, I would like to broaden the scope of the article, including these and other sources.Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa (talk) 15:58, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Guru Fatha, there is a place for Yogic Views on this topic. As per Gatoclass, his illogical use of rules and threats appear like POV but he is just a benign editor. He is actually a totally unqualified voice in this topic. Work with other people and bring more objective facts and references to get your objective inputs included. I have created a new section for "Yogic Philosophy" of "Physio_Kundalini_Syndrome". There's certainly a need for it. This article has gotten MUCH(!) better thanks to you and others... But it still needs some work. Keep in mind gatoclass's word is far from being law on this topic... additionally, he never attempts to improve articles or does any research himself... He's just the article "police", and as such, he thinks he means well, but he is often misinformed.Fatehji (talk) 15:14, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Fatehji, thanks. Did you mean "Yoga Culture and Philosophy"? Also the Vivekananda reference is incomplete. Kindly cite a volume & page number. Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa (talk) 14:50, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Sure, "Yoga Culture and Philosophy" is fair name for the header. I don't mind. I don't have a complete ref for the Vivekenanda reference as it was actually printed in Gururattanas book on Page 62 of Sexuality and Spirituality. It was quoted by Yogi Bhajan and says: "From To Know God by Vivekanada". That's all. Perhaps you could help track it down. I looked into his "complete works" but couldn't find it off hand because there is too much to view.Fatehji (talk) 19:12, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

By the way, the original Yogi Bhajan quotes that I edited down are not sourced properly. Since you added them in first, would you be sure to make sure the references are complete? I'm not sure if they are from a lecture or book. Thanks. Fatehji (talk) 19:19, 20 July 2010 (UTC)