Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.

Why did no one tell me about chakra's? What else am I missing?

edited October 2011 in Buddhism Basics
,
«13

Comments

  • There is a fantastic workbook on the Chakras called "The Sevenfold Journey" if you're interested in delving deeper into them.
  • lol, probably missing a whole bunch of stuff, like me and many others. Kleshas? Jahna? Anatman? Avidya? the thing is, don't try to get to ahead of yourself. You can read a whole pile of books, but knowledge in the mind unpraticed is worthless. Take each step at a time and slow down :)
  • TheswingisyellowTheswingisyellow Trying to be open to existence Samsara Veteran
    They are irrelevent as far as I am concerned. Maybe that's a reason they are not really discussed. 4NT's, 8 fold path, three marks of existence, and kamma (your intentions, actions and their result) this is the core. Buddhism is not something mystical, it is our everyday existence and how we interact within that.
    All the best,
    Todd
  • i believe the Buddha cut away the yogic teachings on the pranic body because its confusing and completely irrelevent if you dont have concentrative power to actually access them. interesting yes, but not necessary for enlightenment.

    knowing how to manipulate prana through with the breath (pranayama) is, however, extremely useful... it can be used to calm the mind significantly and to heal the physical body.
  • What else am I missing?
    Did you learn the secret handshake?
  • LMAO.... no :(
  • Are chakras part of Buddhism, apart from Tibetan Buddhism? I thought chakras were from Hinduism and maybe Taoism. Someone please fill me in, thanks.
  • Chakra means circle.. In the context of yoga it refers to subtle energies in the body. Is this a question of scientific materialism vs spirituality or is it a trash TB question? Just checking :coffee:
  • I'm saying that I'm not aware that chakras are a concept that is part of Buddhism beliefs or knowledge, with the exception of Tibetan Buddhism. I don't recall that the Buddha taught about the body's chakra system. What I'm implying is, that the reason no one told girllikesam about chakras could be because they're not a Buddhist concept. (I'm just trying to answer the OP.) But I could be wrong. It's possible that the Eastern "science" of the body's energetic (chakra) system seeped into all the Buddhist schools from general cultural influences. This is an interesting question. If chakra science is part of Buddhism generally, how did it get there?
  • federicafederica Seeker of the clear blue sky... Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator
    I second @compassionate_warrior. I was about to add something similar.
  • DaltheJigsawDaltheJigsaw Mountain View Veteran
    lol, probably missing a whole bunch of stuff, like me and many others. Kleshas? Jahna? Anatman? Avidya? the thing is, don't try to get to ahead of yourself. You can read a whole pile of books, but knowledge in the mind unpraticed is worthless. Take each step at a time and slow down :)
    I double this!:)
  • There is the chakra of wandering on and the chakra of escape from the wandering on. One is called the wheel of birth and death (samsara) and one the wheel of Dhamma (the eightfold path).

    Any other chakra is just a part of the first *smile* and not necessary for the way. Dont worry if missing things regarding the ongoing wheel.

    Slowing down the first and set the second in move is the way to escape.
    And we start with letting go. *smile*
    Kotishka
  • ManiMani Veteran
    When there is an aspect of something that is not a direct part of one's own practice, then it is often discounted in their own eyes. It is a very narrow viewpoint. But it must be accepted that in certain practices and methods (yes, mainly in Vajrayana/Tibetan Buddhism), the charkras are a definite part of those methods and practices.

    I think it is like someone who has only learned to meditate by counting their breath, then they might say that this is the only way. This is of course, incorrect.

    There will always be the debate between those "purist's" and those who may practice other methods which are certainly within the scope of Buddhism. I like to try to remember that there are many, many methods suitable for the many different kinds of people. And it is important to look at the fact that even in recent history, many people have been able to actually achieve fruition using some of these methods, so I say "the proof is in the pudding".

    Kotishka
  • If one seeks for pudding *smile*.
    Fruition means reaching (completing for the first time) the noble eightfold path (dharma chakra), so we could also simply try to walk it to arrive in its full turn.
  • ManiMani Veteran
    If one seeks for pudding *smile*.
    Fruition means reaching (completing for the first time) the noble eightfold path (dharma chakra), so we could also simply try to walk it to arrive in its full turn.
    I suppose the definition of fruition depends on which vehicle one practices.


    ;)
  • @MrBasin, by 'missing' I implied the concepts or knowledge of them, but yes I am not without avidya that is for sure :D
  • JeffreyJeffrey Veteran
    edited October 2011
    Compassionate warrior, I would second that from my experience in a tibetan buddhist mahayana sangha. I have completed two courses and chakras were never mentioned. Neither were diet and nutrition. As far as I know chakras are not mentioned in the mahayana sutras.
  • They could may not be within buddhism in most branches of it anyway, but would it not be worth-while in your opinion to know about them and to use that knowledge to your advantage? I am not saying that is so, but I just would like to hear people's opinion. It may be similar to say for example knowing knowledge about nutrition and food in general, if you knew very little you would lead an unhealthier lifestyle... Not everything has to be buddhist to be in your life does it?
  • taiyakitaiyaki Veteran
    edited October 2011
    the chakra system is about balancing our different expressions, power, sex, creativity, survival, emotional body, intuition, wisdom, etc.

    this directly correlates with the 8 fold path in that each part relates to the whole.

    you don't necessarily need to believe or experience chakras to understand the "psychological" framework that the chakras present. it is a very deeply provoking and well thought out system.

    the purpose of chakras is to balance them and then awaken kundalini so that one may achieve a new level of consciousness. that is what i've gathered in my study of chakras/kundalini.

    how that fits into buddhism? well even if it does occur Buddhism doesn't care much about it. just like buddhism doesn't care if you work out two times a day or not. it is all personal preference.

    if you study symbology in buddhism you will see that chakras are apparent within buddhist visual knowledge. the buddha's head basically symbolizes the crown chakras, whereas many buddhas are depicted with a bindu on their forehead symbolizing the third eye chakra.

    it is no accident that the buddha is shown in various positions. sitting in meditation, laying on the right side, etc.
    all of these have specific meanings when it comes down to the chakra system.

    as well with meditation. in zazen we sit with our spines erect and with the cosmic mudra. this is mudra is placed either near the hara or the root chakra. it creates a closed circuit.


    i am a nerd when it comes to this kind of stuff. chakra = circles.

    circles = everywhere in symbology.
    Kotishka
  • I don't think the chakra system is "part" of Buddhism, but it's part of the human body. I see them as separate but equally valid and important things. One can be Buddhist without knowledge of the chakras, and vice-versa. But it's nice to have both in your pocket (he says, looking around knowingly with his third eye...)

    :)
  • Which is what I was pointing at :wave:
  • I didn't give chakras so much as a second glance until my third eye one started acting crazy. I've been going through a series of profoundly transformative awakenings, and as a result there is what i can only describe as a spinning wheel, or vortex in the center of my forehead. Not between the eyes like I've read, but directly in the center of the forehead.

    It happens so often that I'm pretty much able to live in harmony with this massive amount of spinning energy. It's a pretty strange sensation, and gets stronger if i put my attention to it. I'm still not entirely sure what it means, if anything, to have a crazy overactive third eye... but its there, and i feel it at this very moment.

    Open to comments about this lol .... but apparently chakras are just as real as anything else (if you catch my drift)

  • Catch ya drift, third eye I have not actually come across personally through any experience, but up until a month ago, I have been one lazy lay buddhist for 3 years so go figure lol :p
  • ManiMani Veteran
    Compassionate warrior, I would second that from my experience in a tibetan buddhist mahayana sangha. I have completed two courses and chakras were never mentioned.
    It is good to remember that many people that practice within the Tibetan Buddhist tradition practice from either the aspect of Sutra, or tantra, or both combined. In sutra practices, one would not come across these things, as they are part of tantric practice methods. Chakra's do play a part in various practices of Highest Yoga Tantra Sadhana's, but this is not the place to go into detail about this.

    Mani

  • ManiMani Veteran
    I don't think the chakra system is "part" of Buddhism, but it's part of the human body. I see them as separate but equally valid and important things.
    Well said. This is another reason why in Vajrayana, it places even greater emphasis on reflecting on the preciousness of a human rebirth.

    Mani

  • In my wanderings I have come across descriptions of the chakras. I know they are in the Tibetan Buddhist tradition, and I am pretty sure they are in the Hindu tradition. What I learned from studying about them is that there are 7 Chakras. The first being located at our tail bone, and is the "root" chakra, almost completely unconscious behavior comes from it, and it dictates our survival instincts and our basic life energy. The second chakra is where our genitals are. It has our sexual/reproductive energies in it. The third chakra is located near our belly button, and is involved with our "fight or flight" reactions. The fourth chakra is located in the heart area, and is involved with our acceptance and openness or the lack there of. The fifth chakra is located in the throat area, and is involved with or self-expression, either we are free to express ourselves or we are repressed to some degree. The sixth chakra is located in the brain center. It is responsible for our thought production, and illusion making, or when controlled by meditation it opens up in a very wide ( almost 360 degree view ). The seventh chakra is located on the very top of the skull, and is the last to open when our awakening takes place and gives us our ( vertical ) integration with the cosmos.
    Now that was the cook book version of the chakra system as I have encountered it. I ain't sayin' its real or not. Its' just my 2 cents worth....
  • JeffreyJeffrey Veteran
    edited October 2011
    wondering that sounds good. I also studied a chakra book designed to be accessible and not really a beginner book, but rather a book appropriate for someone wanting healing yet not in the context of demanding practices or a teacher.

    root- safety and feeling security. Substantialness of earth.
    sacral - creativity in the sense of physically creating. Flowing of water.
    navel - willpower/emotions the heating of fire
    heart - empathy, the clearing (and openness like you say) of air
    throat - mediator between ideas and heart/communication.. the space of ether
    ajna (third eye) - ideas/imagination/planning... the realm of thought
    crown - spiritual (I think you put it well)/liberation... no substance

    This is more from an Indian popular book rather than Tibetan serious awareness practice..

    There is a link between root/crown, sacral/ajna, navel/throat. These compliment eachother. Heart is whole in itself and gives healing energy to the whole system.
  • edited October 2011
    I agree it's useful to have an understanding of the chakra system. This can have a bearing on health, on how people react to you, on how you interact in the world. I think this knowledge came into Vajrayana from Hinduism, along with other aspects of Vajrayana. Chakra science started in India, but the Taoists had it too. Now there's a chicken-and-egg question for a scholar: who figured it out first--the Indians or the Taoists? Or did it develop more or less simultaneously and independently of each other?

    @MintyFresh0 Interesting experience. Have you seen anyone about this?
  • HanzzeHanzze Veteran
    edited October 2011
    If one seeks for pudding *smile*.
    Fruition means reaching (completing for the first time) the noble eightfold path (dharma chakra), so we could also simply try to walk it to arrive in its full turn.
    I suppose the definition of fruition depends on which vehicle one practices.
    ;)
    Pudding - the vehicle of pleasure which lead not out of the circle of suffering, even one miss understands it as real fruition.

    When we talk about fruition in sense of dharma we speak of levels of panna (and the joy comes with it), the stream-enterer, the once-returner, the non-returner, and the liberated one.

    Really joining means to attain the fruition of stream-enterer, that's the moment the right wheel turns on.
    Fruition (phala) before real might slow down the other wheel, but are still fruits of the chakra of suffering. Wholesome deed will cause wholesome phalas and lead us to real fruits.
    :wave:

    So its good to leave the vehicle of pudding (pleasure) turning a big chakra as well.
  • Have you heard of the Truth?

    You don't exist as a self.
  • Maybe you like to explain the intention of this question. Who exists? :wave:
  • Personally, I think the chakras are a sham to be put in the same draw as homeopathy and psychics. Pseudo science cannot bring you closer to the dharma; it can just distract you while filling the pockets of new age bookshops.
  • ManiMani Veteran
    Well sometimes it is more helpful to achieve understanding through direct experience as opposed to just an intellectual knowledge of Dharma, which at this level for all of us will always remain non-perfected wisdom as it is tainted by our dualistic minds.

    While it is completely understandable that there are many different methods with in the many different vehicles, schools, lineages and so-forth within the scope of Buddhism, and to know that everyone practices a method based on their own conditions, it is quite unfortunate for so many to discount aspects of practices that they know little to nothing about. It seems so many who have never practiced Vajrayana, Dzogchen, Mahamudra, etc. have so much to say about it, and this is quite puzzling sometimes.

    M
  • ManiMani Veteran
    Perhaps it is better to take a different approach to this. The original post is actually a little unclear, and has sparked some interesting debate and viewpoints. As a result, the question has kind of become whether or not charkra's are a part of Buddhism, or something like that. Even answering this question is a little difficult because of its broadness. But I might look at it from a different angle and ask "Are chakra's a part of some methods within the scope of Buddhism?" Vajrayana tends to work with the subtle body, which the chakra's are a definite part of, and Vajrayana falls within the entire scope of Buddhism. So by definition, The answer to this question is yes. It is not really disputable.

    I think one thing that may be overlooked is that we usually can only understand things through our own knowledge, past experience, etc. A analogy (albeit a poor one) is that of a tribesman in New Guinea. He most likely has never seen a "ford taurus", let alone probably has never even seen a car. So to him, it simply does not exist, but of course this does not negate the existence of cars, because in our experience we see them everyday.

    So along the same lines of this example, those who's practice does not involve this sort of thing may dismiss it, but it doesn't negate the existence of it within some practices. I think this is part of tolerance of other traditions and vehicles that is so important to keep in mind.

    M

  • :clap:
  • Mani, as a Tibetan Buddhist practitioner, I'm well aware that chakra work is part of the higher practices. That doesn't mean I can't analyze the tradition and objectively say that this aspect of the practice was incorporated into the tradition from an outside source. This is not a criticism, it's simply a statement of fact. I think awareness of the chakras and the role they play in in our lives on many levels is important. I'm not knocking it--to the contrary. TB practitioners could say we have India to thank for this knowledge. For that matter, we have India to thank for the form of Buddhism we practice in general. If the Indian representative hadn't won the Buddhist debate the Tibetan King organized in the 8th century, Tibetans would be practicing Ch'an.

    The OP posed a question that has some interesting ramifications. Can't we enjoy an exploration of those without reading more into the comments than is really there?
  • JeffreyJeffrey Veteran
    edited October 2011
    @Dakini how are you privy to how buddha transmitted the dhamma? Do you hypothesize a homogenous theravadan sangha from buddhas day?

    I would rather believe there was heterogenious beliefs amongst the sangha. Just as we find in early Christianity.

    Don't you think it possible that chakra methods were used by some of buddhas students. And hypothetically students who were enlightened? Indeed the lineage mahayana traditions also claim a descent from the Buddha.
  • "I think one thing that may be overlooked is that we usually can only understand things through our own knowledge, past experience, etc. A analogy (albeit a poor one) is that of a tribesman in New Guinea. He most likely has never seen a "ford taurus", let alone probably has never even seen a car. So to him, it simply does not exist, but of course this does not negate the existence of cars, because in our experience we see them everyday."

    @Mani nailed it
  • edited October 2011

    Don't you think it possible that chakra methods were used by some of buddhas students. And hypothetically students who were enlightened?
    If they did, it would still have been from a Hindu influence, since they were living in Indian society. I think this is interesting, but I'm not sure what point you're trying to prove with it. Are you saying Mahayana evolved directly from some of the Buddha's teachings? I think some of it did, at least it did according to some of the articles that have been posted on the forum before. One of my points in my post earlier was that I don't think that chakra science was something native to Tibet. But maybe it was. It does seem to be part of Inner Asian shamanism, so it could have entered through Bon.

    That still doesn't mean it's something the Buddha taught. It's an interesting question, but I don't think chakras were part of the Dharma. (Why is this statement being viewed as a value judgment?) There's no mention of them in the scriptures, AFAIK. So back to the OP, that may be why, in the context of Buddhism, no one told Sam about chakras. Even if it's part of "Vajrayana", or Highest Yoga Tantra, those teachings are mostly secret, so no one would have told Sam about it.

    @Mani I haven't seen anyone discounting anything, certainly not Vajrayana here. Sorry if anything I posted may have been construed that way. It wasn't meant to be.

  • JeffreyJeffrey Veteran
    edited October 2011
    "Are you saying Mahayana evolved directly from some of the Buddha's teachings? I think some of it did, at least it did according to some of the articles that have been posted on the forum before. One of my points in my post earlier was that I don't think that chakra science was something native to Tibet. But maybe it was. It does seem to be part of Inner Asian shamanism, so it could have entered through Bon."

    cw, I am saying that the lineages in the mahayana go all the way back to buddha. I am also saying that his sangha was heterogenious. It is basicly like the Christians. They all had indivual spiritualities and they all took inspiration from Jesus. Jesus was not a dictator who did not let you be an individual. And neither was buddhist, I mean buddha. There is no reason to think everything going on was included in the scriptures.

    In one sutra buddha picks up a handful of leaves and says that what he has taught is like a handful of leaves, whereas what one can know is like all the leaves in the forest.

    I bet there are some theravadans who do yoga. This is heterogeniety even within modern theravada!

  • JeffreyJeffrey Veteran
    edited October 2011
    The next argument closely related to leaves in the hand.

    1) If no enlightened buddhas have ever been produced then it is a moot point which teaching to follow as none work.

    2) If 1 is false then that means there were subsequent enlightened masters.

    3) If 2 is true then there can be dharma teachings on yoga from subsequent buddhas.


    So it seems like the theravada is acting like the bible saying that no word shall be added or subtracted, whereas the mahayana says there are 84000 dharma gates and if sentient beings need them the buddhas will creat 84001..2...3...etc
  • Jeffrey, I agree that the early sangha was heterogeneous. (Leaving aside for now the question of what "early" means.) And that Mahayana grew out of a group of monks that focussed more on certain of the Buddha's teachings than others, and that's how the Northern and Southern split occurred, over time. But that isn't relevant to chakras. That's all I'm saying. Otherwise, I think you're right on the money--I like your perspective on the early sangha.
  • compassionate_warrior, I am agnostic regarding the chakras. Not sure what buddha taught. I am certain that buddha knew about the chakras as that predates buddha. So it stands to reason that some of his students asked him questions (about the chakras). So answer this for me... where does a question end a teaching begin? Still I am agnostic on the question of chakras.
  • I understand your point now. Not every single conversation between the Buddha and his students was recorded. So we can all be agnostic on this question. Unless we choose to use the sutras as our standard, as so many others have. But that's an individual choice.

    Your point raises another question. How do we define "Buddhism"? Do we define it as what is written in the Pali and other scriptures (Gandhari, etc.) of a certain period? Or do we say, "These scriptures are Buddhism, but a lot of other things may also be Buddhism, but since they didn't get written down, we don't really know what the parameters of Buddhism are"? How do we work with that?
  • it is quite unfortunate for so many to discount aspects of practices that they know little to nothing about. It seems so many who have never practiced Vajrayana, Dzogchen, Mahamudra, etc. have so much to say about it, and this is quite puzzling sometimes.
    I have experience with Vajrayana, and I still think chakras are a sham.

    Also, I just think it's extraneous to the essence of what Buddha taught - which is the 4NT.

  • I'm saying that I'm not aware that chakras are a concept that is part of Buddhism beliefs or knowledge, with the exception of Tibetan Buddhism. I don't recall that the Buddha taught about the body's chakra system. What I'm implying is, that the reason no one told girllikesam about chakras could be because they're not a Buddhist concept. (I'm just trying to answer the OP.) But I could be wrong. It's possible that the Eastern "science" of the body's energetic (chakra) system seeped into all the Buddhist schools from general cultural influences. This is an interesting question. If chakra science is part of Buddhism generally, how did it get there?
    Chakras became part of the teachings of Vajrayana in India, it didn't come from Tibetan Buddhism. Tibetan Buddhism came from ancient Indian Buddhism before it was wiped out in India by Bramins and then Muslims. Both Hindu and Buddhist conceptions of chakras evolved simultaneously, so there is no way of proving who came up with the practice first. Buddhism was the prominent religion of India when the tantric spin came about, so I would go with Buddhism in my opinion, but it's not possible at this time to know from an anthropological standpoint. Though the treatment of the chakras are different in the two systems. One is distinctly Buddhist, and more relative and the other is more of a static treatment of chakras in what appears through Hindu Tantric Systems.

    When you start getting into the higher Jhana states, the experience of the chakras might just manifest spontaneously, as they did for me. As well... they are used for the mind to focus on certain powers within the body having to do with the elements and the gland system, there is nothing "mystical" about it really. If you don't get it, don't worry about it and just practice the 4 NT's and do your jhana cultivation. But, for me, it's very easy to see how they belong in Buddhist practice as people evolved through the basics. It can speed up the path, as they say, if one has a mind for it.
  • VajraheartVajraheart Veteran
    edited October 2011
    it is quite unfortunate for so many to discount aspects of practices that they know little to nothing about. It seems so many who have never practiced Vajrayana, Dzogchen, Mahamudra, etc. have so much to say about it, and this is quite puzzling sometimes.
    I have experience with Vajrayana, and I still think chakras are a sham.

    Also, I just think it's extraneous to the essence of what Buddha taught - which is the 4NT.

    They're not a sham, but they will only manifest for someone with higher jhanic ability. The experience of the chakras are part of my everyday reality, even when dealing with people in the world. They can be felt, seen and experienced viscerally and sometimes powerfully.
    Mani, as a Tibetan Buddhist practitioner, I'm well aware that chakra work is part of the higher practices. That doesn't mean I can't analyze the tradition and objectively say that this aspect of the practice was incorporated into the tradition from an outside source. This is not a criticism, it's simply a statement of fact.
    There is no substantiated proof that this is fact at all. Hindu Tantra and Buddhist Tantra evolved at the same time in the same regions of India during a time when Buddhism was the dominant tradition in India, so I'd argue the other. Hindu's have had 1,000 years to spread propaganda saying what you are saying though, and plenty of people believe it and take it as fact when anthropologically speaking, it might just be Brahmin propaganda.
  • Mani, as a Tibetan Buddhist practitioner, I'm well aware that chakra work is part of the higher practices. That doesn't mean I can't analyze the tradition and objectively say that this aspect of the practice was incorporated into the tradition from an outside source. This is not a criticism, it's simply a statement of fact.
    There is no substantiated proof that this is fact at all. Hindu Tantra and Buddhist Tantra evolved at the same time in the same regions of India during a time when Buddhism was the dominant tradition in India, so I'd argue the other. Hindu's have had 1,000 years to spread propaganda saying what you are saying though, and plenty of people believe it and take it as fact when anthropologically speaking, it might just be Brahmin propaganda.
  • Actually Tantra was no part of Buddhism and is just a later adoption. For sure it is older. I think its important to divide practice which leads maybe to Buddha Dharma and practice that is made when actually reached Buddha Dharma. The last is called simply the noble Eightfold Path. Dharmachakra. :wave:
Sign In or Register to comment.