Belief and kundalini yoga

[Guest guest]

Dear NirvairWhat a refreshing take. Thank you. As a new trainer, we start our second one saturday, i welcome these debates. I come from Sivananda yoga, and have done a bit of stydying, and yes, some of the ideas in ky have been entirely new.But i always go back to what YB said, he never took anything on as a belief, he tested it. He did this with everything. He also knew how to obey, and that seems to be a key.Where we test ourselves in our ability to obey, we build trust, from this trust we access ourselves, our own understanding. Remember we don' trust a man/woman, but an institution/teacher. This is because that's the access point; it's not personal or emotional.If Yogi Bhajan had relied on his emotional reactions, he would definitely not have stayed with HIS teacher! Surely you are not required to believe anything are you?You will know, when /if you become a teacher that this is your last incarnation, for instance, or you will see that it has other facets not covered by that statement, or have your own way of expressing what it is about. Love Har Hari KaurCambridgeIn my mind, the issue is not whether an idea in a yoga philosophy is personally offensive or divisive, but whether or not it is true.And I am NOT saying that I think that the idea that woman is 16 times more powerful than man is true!I'm saying: acceptance or dismissal needs to be on the basis of the authenticity of the source and not on a personal emotional reaction to the idea.My question would be: "Where in Patanjali's Yoga Sutras is that particular idea put forth?" Or, "What classic yoga text are you using to support your position?" There's a reason why these texts have been around for thousands of years.When I took KY Teachers Training just last year, I was also amazed at some of the concepts presented as though they were absolutely, unequivocally true. Other folks in my training seemed willing to swallow it all whole just because someone in authority (the trainer)was saying that someone else in authority (Yogi Bhajan) had said it was so. I always wanted to know "Where did that come from?" Some of these ideas I had never heard of, but KY is a lineage extending back thousands of years, just like other lineages and schools, and so I thought there would be some precedent for these ideas, some writings to refer to, some other teacher who had had the same experiences and reached the same conclusion . . . but there wasn't.There's a sort of Catch-22 in KY that makes this area difficult to navigate. Many people who come to KY from other yoga traditions have studied the ancient texts that have been used by millions as roadmaps to conscious awareness and enlightenment. When presented with a conflicting idea in KY, we want to know whose roadmap that comes from. But the standard answer seems to be that since KY was taught in secret, one-to-one, for so many years before Yogi Bhajan taught it openly, there are no texts, there are no writings, there are no other teachers we can turn to -- the only hard copy for us to refer to is what this one man, Yogi Bhajan, has been saying and writing for only the last 35 years. We need to just trust that all that he has taught is an accurate representation of what his teachers taught him, even though we have no other reference points to utilize.So when I hear a statement like "The incarnation of a teacher is the final incarnation" -- or you hear a statement like "in order for full enlightenment to take place, man must marry a woman . . . " -- that doesn't fit with ANYTHING I've studied in any other yoga system, I'm not going to give much credence to it unless someone can show me that yes, the saints and sages of old explored this idea, they experiemented with it, and here in these specific writngs from this particular lineage, they set out their position.Nirvair Kaur

[Guest guest]

Sat Nam, Har Hari Kaur,

 

Thank you for your kind words.

 

I was taught not to trust the teacher, but to trust the teachings. Not

to love the teacher, but to love the teachings.

 

My orientation toward obedience is based on the guru-disciple model.

That is, if I were to become a disciple of a particular spiritually

evolved person, I would be entering a contractual relationship in which

one of my responsibilities would be to obey the guru.

 

According to this model, the student-teacher relationship is a separate

entity in which obedience cannot be asked for, or demanded, or expected,

by the teacher. The karmic link between the two individuals is entirely

different and therefore, so are the rules of the game, so to speak.

 

It would be hard for me to test the specific concepts we are talking

about in these posts in my own experience in this lifetime. That is, I

could not offer proof through my own experience that an unmarried

person, or a homosexual or bisexual person, can or cannot be fully

enlightened. : ) I would think we would have to conclude that Yogi

Bhajan could not either. That is why the body of teachings compiled by

spiritually evolved teachers on the basis of their own experiments with

consciousness is important.

 

So -- I test what I can. I accept that what I cannot test could

possibly be true. But I weigh it. And sometimes, for me, I hear what

Yogi Bhajan says as what only one teacher is saying, and contradictory

to what many other teachers have said. So I am not willing to just " buy

into it " .

 

I am teaching now, so if I DO come back in another incarnation I will

try to find you and let you know that, in my experience, that statement

didn't hold true.

 

Nirvair Kaur

 

 

Kundalini-Yoga , harharikaur <harharikaur

wrote:

>

> Dear Nirvair

>

> What a refreshing take. Thank you. As a new trainer, we start our

> second one saturday, i welcome these debates.

> I come from Sivananda yoga, and have done a bit of stydying, and yes,

> some of the ideas in ky have been entirely new.

> But i always go back to what YB said, he never took anything on as a

> belief, he tested it. He did this with everything. He also knew how

> to obey, and that seems to be a key.

> Where we test ourselves in our ability to obey, we build trust, from

> this trust we access ourselves, our own understanding.

> Remember we don' trust a man/woman, but an institution/teacher. This

> is because that's the access point; it's not personal or emotional.

> If Yogi Bhajan had relied on his emotional reactions, he would

> definitely not have stayed with HIS teacher!

> Surely you are not required to believe anything are you?

> You will know, when /if you become a teacher that this is your last

> incarnation, for instance, or you will see that it has other facets

> not covered by that statement, or have your own way of expressing

> what it is about.

>

> Love

> Har Hari Kaur

> Cambridge

>

>

>

> In my mind, the issue is not whether an idea in a yoga philosophy is

> personally offensive or divisive, but whether or not it is true.

>

> And I am NOT saying that I think that the idea that woman is 16

> times more powerful than man is true!

>

> I'm saying: acceptance or dismissal needs to be on the basis of the

> authenticity of the source and not on a personal emotional reaction

> to the idea.

>

> My question would be: " Where in Patanjali's Yoga Sutras is that

> particular idea put forth? " Or, " What classic yoga text are you

> using to support your position? " There's a reason why these texts

> have been around for thousands of years.

>

> When I took KY Teachers Training just last year, I was also amazed

> at some of the concepts presented as though they were absolutely,

> unequivocally true. Other folks in my training seemed willing to

> swallow it all whole just because someone in authority (the trainer)

> was saying that someone else in authority (Yogi Bhajan) had said it

> was so. I always wanted to know " Where did that come from? " Some

> of these ideas I had never heard of, but KY is a lineage extending

> back thousands of years, just like other lineages and schools, and

> so I thought there would be some precedent for these ideas, some

> writings to refer to, some other teacher who had had the same

> experiences and reached the same conclusion . . . but there wasn't.

>

> There's a sort of Catch-22 in KY that makes this area difficult to

> navigate. Many people who come to KY from other yoga traditions

> have studied the ancient texts that have been used by millions as

> roadmaps to conscious awareness and enlightenment. When presented

> with a conflicting idea in KY, we want to know whose roadmap that

> comes from. But the standard answer seems to be that since KY was

> taught in secret, one-to-one, for so many years before Yogi Bhajan

> taught it openly, there are no texts, there are no writings, there

> are no other teachers we can turn to -- the only hard copy for us to

> refer to is what this one man, Yogi Bhajan, has been saying and

> writing for only the last 35 years. We need to just trust that all

> that he has taught is an accurate representation of what his

> teachers taught him, even though we have no other reference points

> to utilize.

>

> So when I hear a statement like " The incarnation of a teacher is the

> final incarnation " -- or you hear a statement like " in order for

> full enlightenment to take place, man must marry a woman . . . " --

> that doesn't fit with ANYTHING I've studied in any other yoga

> system, I'm not going to give much credence to it unless someone can

> show me that yes, the saints and sages of old explored this idea,

> they experiemented with it, and here in these specific writngs from

> this particular lineage, they set out their position.

>

> Nirvair Kaur

>

[Guest guest]

Nirvair Kaur

 

Yogi Bhajan taught a lot of things: KY, Sikhism, humanology,

numerology, Ayurvedic and yogic remedies, and many others. These

were often taught separately but could be taught synergisticly and

often were. I think you may be lumping all his teachings into one as

KY. YB was adamant in that KY should be taught as he learned it from

his teacher and their forebearers. He did teach this way and did not

want the teachings changed. Dogma if you will.

 

His other teachings, he gave to raise their spirit. He always said

that he is the messenger. Take the teachings if you want or not.

The only way to really find out is through experience but he YB gave

us lots of shortcuts through his teachings so we would not have to

reinvent the wheel of consciousness.

 

As for finding info on yoga in Patanjali's Sutras and the yogic

texts, all of yogic teachings are not in the texts. This is

especially true for KY. Most were given from teacher to student

throughout the centuries. Yogiji, himself, said that he neverread an

entire book in his life. He kept all the kriyas and meditations he

taught in his head.

 

 

 

In my mind, the issue is not whether an idea in a yoga philosophy is

personally offensive or divisive, but whether or not it is true.

 

And I am NOT saying that I think that the idea that woman is 16

times more powerful than man is true!

 

I'm saying: acceptance or dismissal needs to be on the basis of the

authenticity of the source and not on a personal emotional reaction

to the idea.

 

My question would be: " Where in Patanjali's Yoga Sutras is that

particular idea put forth? " Or, " What classic yoga text are you

using to support your position? " There's a reason why these texts

have been around for thousands of years.

 

When I took KY Teachers Training just last year, I was also amazed

at some of the concepts presented as though they were absolutely,

unequivocally true. Other folks in my training seemed willing to

swallow it all whole just because someone in authority (the trainer)

was saying that someone else in authority (Yogi Bhajan) had said it

was so. I always wanted to know " Where did that come from? " Some

of these ideas I had never heard of, but KY is a lineage extending

back thousands of years, just like other lineages and schools, and

so I thought there would be some precedent for these ideas, some

writings to refer to, some other teacher who had had the same

experiences and reached the same conclusion . . . but there wasn't.

 

There's a sort of Catch-22 in KY that makes this area difficult to

navigate. Many people who come to KY from other yoga traditions

have studied the ancient texts that have been used by millions as

roadmaps to conscious awareness and enlightenment. When presented

with a conflicting idea in KY, we want to know whose roadmap that

comes from. But the standard answer seems to be that since KY was

taught in secret, one-to-one, for so many years before Yogi Bhajan

taught it openly, there are no texts, there are no writings, there

are no other teachers we can turn to -- the only hard copy for us to

refer to is what this one man, Yogi Bhajan, has been saying and

writing for only the last 35 years. We need to just trust that all

that he has taught is an accurate representation of what his

teachers taught him, even though we have no other reference points

to utilize.

 

So when I hear a statement like " The incarnation of a teacher is the

final incarnation " -- or you hear a statement like " in order for

full enlightenment to take place, man must marry a woman . . . " --

that doesn't fit with ANYTHING I've studied in any other yoga

system, I'm not going to give much credence to it unless someone can

show me that yes, the saints and sages of old explored this idea,

they experiemented with it, and here in these specific writngs from

this particular lineage, they set out their position.

 

Nirvair Kaur

[Guest guest]

Sat Nam, Guru K,

 

Thank you for your post.

 

I think you are correct in that sometimes I am not clear as to which

are the particular teachings of KY and which are the teachings

pertaining to other areas. I see that these teachings can be

complimentary and can be taught synergistically, but I think it's

important to separate the threads, especially for new students and

for those in KY Teachers Training.

 

In my KY Teachers Training, a student asked a guest trainer, " What

is the relationship between KY and Sikhism? " I would venture to say

that most of us in the class knew where she was coming from, as the

practice of her own religion had been important to her for many

years. She needed clarification and reassurance. The trainer's

response was, " In my mind, there is no difference. " Since this man

had been practicing KY and had been a Sikh for decades, I could also

see where he was coming from. For him the two worked together

synergistically so well that he didn't feel a need to separate and

categorize them.

 

The student who asked the question didn't hear that in the answer,

and neither did many others. The class was in an uproar.

 

I thought that, as a trainer, this man should have been able to

understand the question the student was asking from her perspective

and give a clear answer. (This can't be the first time this

question has been asked, right? So there should have been some prior

thought given to it and to possible answers.) When senior teachers

of KY aren't clear themselves as to what is KY, what are those

teachings, and what is not, then those of us who are just learning

have more confusion to work through.

 

Having said that, I understand and completely agree with Yogi

Bhajan's insistence that KY be taught by his students as he learned

it from his teachers, without changing it; that is a caveat of many

yoga lineages.

 

I also know that many yogic teachings are not found in books. If

you were fortunate enough to learn directly from Yogi Bhajan, I

would venture to say that you knew in your soul that you were being

taught by a Master, and that he could have recited the yellow pages

to you and effected change in your consciousness. Students of the

Master may still need to be a bit more particular about the actual

information they disseminate.

 

Nirvair Kaur

 

 

Kundalini-Yoga , " Guru K " <greatyoga

wrote:

 

Nirvair Kaur

 

Yogi Bhajan taught a lot of things: KY, Sikhism, humanology,

numerology, Ayurvedic and yogic remedies, and many others. These

were often taught separately but could be taught synergisticly and

often were. I think you may be lumping all his teachings into one

as KY. YB was adamant in that KY should be taught as he learned it

from his teacher and their forebearers. He did teach this way and

did not want the teachings changed. Dogma if you will.

 

His other teachings, he gave to raise their spirit. He always said

that he is the messenger. Take the teachings if you want or not.

The only way to really find out is through experience but he YB

gave us lots of shortcuts through his teachings so we would not have

to reinvent the wheel of consciousness.

 

As for finding info on yoga in Patanjali's Sutras and the yogic

texts, all of yogic teachings are not in the texts. This is

especially true for KY. Most were given from teacher to student

throughout the centuries. Yogiji, himself, said that he never read

an entire book in his life. He kept all the kriyas and meditations

he taught in his head.

[Guest guest]

Kundalini-Yoga , " Guru K " <greatyoga wrote:

>

> Nirvair Kaur

>

> Yogi Bhajan taught a lot of things: KY, Sikhism, humanology,

> numerology, Ayurvedic and yogic remedies, and many others. These

> were often taught separately but could be taught synergisticly and

> often were. I think you may be lumping all his teachings into one as

> KY. YB was adamant in that KY should be taught as he learned it from

> his teacher and their forebearers. He did teach this way and did not

> want the teachings changed. Dogma if you will.

>

> His other teachings, he gave to raise their spirit. He always said

> that he is the messenger. Take the teachings if you want or not.

> The only way to really find out is through experience but he YB gave

> us lots of shortcuts through his teachings so we would not have to

> reinvent the wheel of consciousness.

>

> As for finding info on yoga in Patanjali's Sutras and the yogic

> texts, all of yogic teachings are not in the texts. This is

> especially true for KY. Most were given from teacher to student

> throughout the centuries. Yogiji, himself, said that he neverread an

> entire book in his life. He kept all the kriyas and meditations he

> taught in his head.

>

>

>

> In my mind, the issue is not whether an idea in a yoga philosophy is

> personally offensive or divisive, but whether or not it is true.

>

> And I am NOT saying that I think that the idea that woman is 16

> times more powerful than man is true!

>

> I'm saying: acceptance or dismissal needs to be on the basis of the

> authenticity of the source and not on a personal emotional reaction

> to the idea.

>

> My question would be: " Where in Patanjali's Yoga Sutras is that

> particular idea put forth? " Or, " What classic yoga text are you

> using to support your position? " There's a reason why these texts

> have been around for thousands of years.

>

> When I took KY Teachers Training just last year, I was also amazed

> at some of the concepts presented as though they were absolutely,

> unequivocally true. Other folks in my training seemed willing to

> swallow it all whole just because someone in authority (the trainer)

> was saying that someone else in authority (Yogi Bhajan) had said it

> was so. I always wanted to know " Where did that come from? " Some

> of these ideas I had never heard of, but KY is a lineage extending

> back thousands of years, just like other lineages and schools, and

> so I thought there would be some precedent for these ideas, some

> writings to refer to, some other teacher who had had the same

> experiences and reached the same conclusion . . . but there wasn't.

>

> There's a sort of Catch-22 in KY that makes this area difficult to

> navigate. Many people who come to KY from other yoga traditions

> have studied the ancient texts that have been used by millions as

> roadmaps to conscious awareness and enlightenment. When presented

> with a conflicting idea in KY, we want to know whose roadmap that

> comes from. But the standard answer seems to be that since KY was

> taught in secret, one-to-one, for so many years before Yogi Bhajan

> taught it openly, there are no texts, there are no writings, there

> are no other teachers we can turn to -- the only hard copy for us to

> refer to is what this one man, Yogi Bhajan, has been saying and

> writing for only the last 35 years. We need to just trust that all

> that he has taught is an accurate representation of what his

> teachers taught him, even though we have no other reference points

> to utilize.

>

> So when I hear a statement like " The incarnation of a teacher is the

> final incarnation " -- or you hear a statement like " in order for

> full enlightenment to take place, man must marry a woman . . . " --

> that doesn't fit with ANYTHING I've studied in any other yoga

> system, I'm not going to give much credence to it unless someone can

> show me that yes, the saints and sages of old explored this idea,

> they experiemented with it, and here in these specific writngs from

> this particular lineage, they set out their position.

>

> Nirvair Kaur

>

I was teaching a death and dying course some years ago which was

heavily based on Yogi Bhajan's teachings. At the end of the day, one

of the students asked why she should believe me. My response was that

she should not believe me, and that belief was not the object.

Experience is the key. It is like when a scientific research finding

is made public. The results must be subject to duplication. So we

start with a highly reputable source, Yogi Bhajan; but until you can

replicate in your own experience the lesson taught, there must be

doubt, and it is not your knowledge. Invariably a great teacher will

say things that conflict with your pre-established concepts. Why are

you worried?

[Guest guest]

Sat Nam,

Both Sikhism and Kundalini Yoga become meaningful in our lives through

personal experience. Belief is absolutely secondary. When belief is the

primary focus in any practice it becomes ritual.

 

The advice I give myself is " Get Real! " When I do Sat Kriya, I reach

for pure Truth, totally pour my body mind and soul into it and bring in

the ten Gurus one by one for support. It is a vast, powerful synergetic

experience. Knowing this I would never settle for less.

 

Blessings in all devotions and higher endeavors,

Guruprem Kaur

Memoirs of a Yogini

[Guest guest]

Some great discussion going on

here!

 

Ek Ong Kaar Kaur brings up the

point about our ‘filters.’ Keep in mind that we are all, like it or

not, products of our culture – i.e., the U.S. is

predominately Judaeo/Christian with a very strong strain of Puritanism/work

ethic. When Yogi Bhajan started teaching, most of us were from

Jewish/Catholic/Protestant upbringings. A few of us were brought up

agnostic/atheist. When we started to experience the dramatic results of practicing

Kundalini Yoga, many of us became evangelistic and somewhat fanatic in our zeal

to share the ‘good news’ with others – whether they wanted to

hear it or not. Yogi Bhajan didn’t ask us to be this way, although it’s

what many of us thought he meant.

 

As Sikh Dharma was introduced to

us, many had the same zeal but, unfortunately, judgmental attitudes toward

those not practicing the way we were. There are some very interesting stories

about the first encounters American and Indian Sikhs had with each other. What

a lot of the issues boiled down to were the differences between two cultures

and how each related to Sikh Dharma.

 

Fortunately, Yogi Bhajan had

enough patience to tolerate a lot of nonsense and continue to impart the

teachings as he had learned and experienced them.

 

As 3HO and Sikh Dharma in the

West mature as communities, many of those cultural artifacts have dropped away.

However, we still maintain much or our native culture. The next time you’re

at a Solstice, hang out with your brothers and sisters from another country, or

better yet, go to the Yoga Festival in Europe.

One can find their own relationship with their practice (Kundalini Yoga, Sikh

Dharma or both) by experiencing the teachings through the lens of different

teachers and also different cultures.

 

We should never stop examining what

works for us in our own practice. However, we need to be aware that if we have

a strong reaction to one of the teachings, rather that rejecting it out of had,

we may want to check out what that reaction is all about. It may take a lot of

meditation and self-examination to find the answer, but that’s where

self-awareness is deepened.

 

Yogiji was the best at poking,

provoking and confronting a student’s ego. That was his job and he was

the Master of it. However, when all of the hooha subsided, he was always there

to elevate. That’s what the teachings are designed to do – challenge

and transcend cultural, political and personal boundaries.

 

Amar Singh

 

[Guest guest]

Sat Nam Nirvair, Har Hari Kaur, Charanpreet and others,

I only have a minute so I'll keep this real brief.

Two things are on my mind.

One - know that Yogi Bhajan was a Master of Ayurveda and Vedic

language. To understand more fully, but not completely, one would have

spend some time *on their own* studying Ayurveda. A lot will make more

sense.

Two - Know the man, Yogi Bhajan, from the perspective of Tantric

Numerology. His Projection AND Path numbers were both Ten. Tens speak

in a powerful, direct language, all or nothing. Nothing wishy washy

about a Ten. Additionally his Soul and Karma numbers are both Eight.

Even more power! Like lightning. It is/was totally appropriate for him

to say things the way he did because it was appropriate for him. This

is not the totality of the man but it's what many, many people get from

him and they get stuck with just that.

 

Be inspired by his presence without the words, the teachings and his

example but do your own homework, and then re-present it with your own

God given set of talents and gifts. He came here to train teachers, not

gather a following of students.

Blessings,

Dharam Singh

Millis, MA