|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
AustrianYogi
Austria
31 Posts |
 Posted - Sep 30 2008 : 07:05:49 AM
|
Hello and Atma Namaste from Vienna, Austria!
Concerning Shiva and Shakti, I found different explanations:
Shiva (located in the crown) is consciousness, Shakti (located at the base of the spine) is energy. In ida there is female energy, in pingala male energy. Ida conducts mental prana, pingala conducts life energy ("Prana, Pranayama, Prana Vidya" by Swami Niranjanananda Saraswati).
But when Shiva is consciousness, unmanifested, how can there be (manifested) Shive-energy? But when there is no Shiva-energy, how can the pingala-nadi be male? Or are there 2 polarities: On the one hand Shiva/Shakti and on the other hand Shakti, who becomes 2 polar enrgies in ida and pingala)?!
And when Shiva is unmanifested, which is the energy coming down and meeting Shakti in the heart?
Thank you very much in advance for your contributions.
Andreas from Vienna, Austria |
Edited by - AustrianYogi on Sep 30 2008 09:46:29 AM |
|
|
x.j.
304 Posts |
Posted - Sep 30 2008 : 2:34:32 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by AustrianYogi
Hello and Atma Namaste from Vienna, Austria!
Concerning Shiva and Shakti, I found different explanations:
Shiva (located in the crown) is consciousness, Shakti (located at the base of the spine) is energy. In ida there is female energy, in pingala male energy. Ida conducts mental prana, pingala conducts life energy ("Prana, Pranayama, Prana Vidya" by Swami Niranjanananda Saraswati).
But when Shiva is consciousness, unmanifested, how can there be (manifested) Shive-energy? But when there is no Shiva-energy, how can the pingala-nadi be male? Or are there 2 polarities: On the one hand Shiva/Shakti and on the other hand Shakti, who becomes 2 polar energies in ida and pingala)?!And when Shiva is unmanifested, which is the energy coming down and meeting Shakti in the heart?
Andreas from Vienna, Austria
Hi Andreas,
Those are theoretical questions you raise, and in general, we as a group here, are more concerned with meditation and associated practices, as formulated by Yogani. I would advise you to do the suggested AYP practices and see what answer you come up with yourself. Then you can tell us what you have concluded.
Maybe others will be of more help but that's all that comes to mind.
Besides as Kabir pointed out in one of his lovely poems, one does not freely discuss what happened in bed with our Beloved to anyone we might meet at the pub. |
 |
|
|
AustrianYogi
Austria
31 Posts |
Posted - Sep 30 2008 : 5:24:54 PM
|
Hello!
I am of the opinion that of course it is important to practise; nevertheless yoga claims to be a science and so a theoretical framework is - I hope not only for me - helpful! It is not my style just to practise without a deep understanding and knowledge.
Andreas |
Edited by - AustrianYogi on Sep 30 2008 5:30:00 PM |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4363 Posts |
Posted - Sep 30 2008 : 5:48:22 PM
|
Hi Andreas,
I think you are complicating things a bit. If you think of Shakti as being energy/ ecstasy and shiva as being consciousness/ bliss, and of enlightenment as being the merging of these two elements in the heart and the crown and everywhere else in the body, then that will be a great help on the path.
Christi |
|
|
|
AustrianYogi
Austria
31 Posts |
Posted - Sep 30 2008 : 7:15:43 PM
|
Hello!
Einstein said that we should keep things as simple as possible but not simpler ...:-).
Andreas
|
|
|
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
Posted - Oct 01 2008 : 06:46:25 AM
|
Andreas,
nevertheless yoga claims to be a science and so
I wouldn't say Yoga is a science, at least not in the restricted, modern English sense of the word 'science'. I believe the German word 'Wissenschaft', with which you are surely much more familiar than I am, is somewhat broader, and can mean more like 'body of knowledge' in English.
One reason why I'd hesitate to call it a science in the modern sense of the word is that it's terms are not precisely defined. It's categories are very, very fuzzy. The writers of the ancient texts wrote in metaphor, and much of it is poetic.
But when Shiva is consciousness, unmanifested, how can there be (manifested) Shive-energy?
The Shakti - Shiva as categories probably don't refer to 'things' as we know them with precise properties. They are not as precise as that. I believe they are better understood as principles. Something like the 'yin/yang' categorization. They arose as a means to get a mental handle on what is happening. The do serve to provide this mental handle.
When they say 'Shiva is unmanifested', this doesn't mean that there is a thing called Shiva which doesn't manifest. Rather, I believe it is hinting at the invisible, behind-the-scenes nature of what they mean by the Shiva categorization.
how can the pingala-nadi be male?
It's not male really. It's subjectively experienced (not by me -- I don't experience it, at least not so far) as having a 'male' energy, and it gets described as male.
Regards,
-David
|
|
|
|
AustrianYogi
Austria
31 Posts |
Posted - Oct 02 2008 : 1:28:15 PM
|
Hello!
I do not agree with David. Of course, there are differences between yoga and ohter sciences (I was a scientist at the Vienna University of Economics and Business Administration).
So in yoga our measuring instrument is silent awareness, and everybody who follows a path will - maybe after some more incarnations - make the same experiences like other seekers before him; the results of the path are nevertheless predictible, so yoga is a science!
The categories are fuzzy, but this is the same for example with the term "cash-flow": There are hundreds of definitions.
With pingala being "male" and ida being "female" I want to express that the energy of pingala is hot and is mostly associated with Shiva, while ida is cool and associated with Shakti; but I also found in books that ida "is" Shiva and pingala "is" Shakti.
I mean that as far as it is possible, a seeker should use his mind on the path. The clarification of such basic terms like ida, pingala, Shiva, Shakti is essential for a deeper understanding. (I know that the deepest understanding is experience, but then the seeker is not a seeker any more, he then has found!).
Andreas |
|
|
|
CarsonZi
Canada
3189 Posts |
Posted - Oct 02 2008 : 2:28:24 PM
|
Hi Andreas,
I agree with you in a sense and I agree with David in a sense too. Two extremes in my opinion with the middle ground being a much more hospitable place. Understanding and knowledge is good to an extent. But when knowledge starts to create expectations then it is bad. Because it is the expectations that lead us astray. You expect something, therefor it doesn't happen. (you are watching and waiting for it to happen so it never does) So knowledge will only take you so far. Then faith and instinct have to take over. You can't rely solely on faith, but you can't rely solely on rationality/intellect either. A fine balance is what is necessary. Some aspects of the yogic journey will probably NEVER be explained by science. Doesn't mean these don't happen. But on the same token, you have to have some kind of a rough idea of what to do and where it should take you, or you may never set foot on the path. Hope this helps.
In Love,
CarsonZi |
Edited by - CarsonZi on Oct 02 2008 2:30:15 PM |
|
|
|
emc
2072 Posts |
Posted - Oct 02 2008 : 3:05:32 PM
|
We've had some discussions about the male - female paradox before. Perhaps this is of interest?
http://www.aypsite.org/forum/topic....OPIC_ID=2939
and also this topic, at least from the middle somewhere... (I chose my post now to show from where the confusion got pointed out.)
http://www.aypsite.org/forum/topic....D=1474#23362
We all seem to be confused around this. I got even more confused when two descriptions clashed in my head:
Feminine: Form, Mother Earth, Everything, Love
Masculine: Non-form, Consciousness, Nothing, Emptiness, Truth
And then suddenly in other symbols:
Masculine: The white bright light of Pure consciousness
Feminine: Blackness, Universal womb, Void, Vastness
Suddenly the Masculine is Light... which is Something coming out of the Feminine Nothing... Hm? But Everything is Energy and thus Light. so... Light and the White in the Yang side is... feminine? 
It seems to switch all the time back and forth, so finally my mind has gone so tired of this dichotomy, I've dropped trying to understand it. It's two polarities. Which one is masculine, which one is feminine I don't care about anylonger. It's all One. Basta!  |
Edited by - emc on Oct 02 2008 3:13:03 PM |
|
|
|
AustrianYogi
Austria
31 Posts |
Posted - Oct 02 2008 : 3:12:47 PM
|
Hello!
I do not have any expectations except that one day, in this lifetime or in one of the next, enlightenment will happen.
Let us compare my questions with driving a car: Of coursse I can drive it, even if I do not know that there is a motor..; I only have to operate the wheel and the pedals.
But this is for me not enough: I want to know how it works, I want to have a mental framework, even if the knowledge will deepen later by driving the car more skilfully.
So: Does anyone (Yogani?) know more about Shiva, Shakti, ida, pingala, energy, consciousness and wants to share the knowledge??? 
Andreas |
Edited by - AustrianYogi on Oct 02 2008 3:13:39 PM |
|
|
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
Posted - Oct 02 2008 : 3:24:47 PM
|
Andreas claims to disagree with me, but I haven't noticed any respect in which he disagrees with what I said. And Carson thinks we're at two extremes with some hospitable truth between us.
|
|
|
|
CarsonZi
Canada
3189 Posts |
Posted - Oct 04 2008 : 2:09:55 PM
|
David,
You said: "Carson thinks we're at two extremes with some hospitable truth between us."
Don't you?
You said that the whole dichotomy of ida/pingala, (or whatever names you want to ascribe to the polarities involved here) that the whole idea of attaching the premise that these are actually "things" to them, is false and that these are mere "properties" or maybe "characteristics" right? And Andreas is saying no, these are studiable, things that imperical knowledge can be obtained on. How are these NOT opposite sides of the same coin? I don't understand how you think what you are saying is the same as what Andreas is saying. Can you please point out to me (and probably to Andreas too) how what Adreas said is NOT in contradiction with what you have said. I'm not trying to take a side on this, I think the middle suits me just nice, but I am curious to understand how YOU see this David, cause I can't quite grasp it. Thanks for the clarifications.
In Love,
CarsonZi
|
|
|
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
Posted - Oct 04 2008 : 4:57:48 PM
|
Sure. Andreas is saying that he disagrees with me that yoga is a science. But I only said that I don't believe yoga is a science in the modern sense of the word. But his definition of science is not a definition of science in the modern sense of the word.
So I take his point as a semantic one -- that he will define 'science' in an expansive way that includes yoga -- and for which a claim that certain results will be found after 'reincarnation' will count as evidence. He may define science as he wishes, but that doesn't count as scientific evidence in the minds of modern scientists. A semantic point such as this isn't to be agreed or disagreed with exactly -- though one can point out that someone is proceeding with unusual senses of words.
If he is saying that a claim that 'everyone will find this, at least after re-incarnation if necessary' counts as scientific evidence in the modern sense of the words, then I disagree strongly.
that the whole idea of attaching the premise that these are actually "things" to them, is false and that these are mere "properties" or maybe "characteristics" right
I was actually talking about Shakti/Shiva, not ida/pingala. Ida/Pingala seem much more like things, as do the chakras.
I'm not saying, by the way, that yoga is outside the realm of science, nor am I saying that yoga isn't in any respect susceptible to scientific method, nor that there can't be a modern science of yoga.
Just that yoga isn't a science in the modern sense of the word, and what it offers and expresses isn't generally going to dovetail nicely with a literal and precise scientific mind-set, and it shouldn't be expected to.
With pingala being "male" and ida being "female" I want to express that the energy of pingala is hot and is mostly associated with Shiva, while ida is cool and associated with Shakti; but I also found in books that ida "is" Shiva and pingala "is" Shakti.
I don't believe that these statements that 'ida "is" Shiva' should be interpreted as scientific statements along the lines as 'diamond is carbon'. I don't believe the literal modern scientific mentality is a fit for what these phrases are saying.
|
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4363 Posts |
Posted - Oct 05 2008 : 5:44:52 PM
|
Hi AustrianYogi
quote:
Einstein said that we should keep things as simple as possible but not simpler ...:-).
Andreas
O.K..... so what is Siva, and what is Shakti, and what does it have to do with Ida and Pingala?
First off, Siva is a God, and Shakti is his wife. Siva has dread locks and a river coming out of his hair. In Tantra, Siva is also synonymous with Brahman, and Shakti is synonymous with maha-maya. Shiva is maha-purusha, and Shakti is maha-prakriti. So Siva is unmanifest, unborn, uncreated existence, and Shakti is manifest (both visible and invisible), created (maya) existence.
Shakti is also energy (the word means energy), and in kundalini tantra kundalini is referred to as kundalini Shakti. When kundalini Shakti rises to the level of the crown chakra, the crown becomes inverted and begins to shine with light. Above the crown chakra is the Brahmarundra, or the gateway to God, via which a human can come to know directly divine consciousness. So Siva, or unmanifest existence from which all manifest existence is created, is said to reside in the crown of each human being.
So where does ida and pingala come into all this? Ida and pingala are two nadis, or rivers of light. They are greenish blue in colour and weave around the sushumna nadi going up the body from the root chakra and ending on each side of the nose. Kundalini Shakti will not enter the sushumna, and begin her divine assent until the energies of the ida and pingala nadis are in balance with each other. These two nadis reflect the polarities of human existence, being male/female, light/dark, solar lunar etc. The ida nadi is associated with feminine, created energy, as Shakti is, and the pingala nadi is associated with solar, male, creative energy just as Siva is. But to say that pingala is Siva would be no more true than saying that Siva is the crown chakra. To say that the ida nadi is Shakti would be true, but only in the sense that all nadis are made of prana (energy) and are therefore Shakti.
Christi
|
Edited by - Christi on Oct 05 2008 5:47:14 PM |
|
|
|
AustrianYogi
Austria
31 Posts |
Posted - Oct 09 2008 : 07:41:05 AM
|
Hello!
When Shiva = unmanifested God, What is Brahman? I know the trinity Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva, and they all are Brahmans offspring; is there a second understanding of "Shiva".
When Shiva is unmanifested, only consciousness, how then can "Shiva-energy" go down?
When Shiva is pure consciousness, why does ida,which is a channel for mental prana (manas shakti) correspond with the female principle and pingala which channels life-energy (prana shakti - see: Kundalini Tantra by Swami Satyananda Saraswati) correspomd with the male principle (mind is closer to consciousness than the life-force of the astral body, which is denser)?
Andreas |
Edited by - AustrianYogi on Oct 09 2008 08:07:05 AM |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4363 Posts |
Posted - Oct 09 2008 : 12:20:22 PM
|
Hi Andreas,
quote:
When Shiva = unmanifested God, What is Brahman? I know the trinity Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva, and they all are Brahmans offspring; is there a second understanding of "Shiva".
Yes, in this case Shiva is being used as unmanifest God and is synonymous with Brahman. There are other cases of this in Yoga. Krishna devotees often describe Krishna as the highest Godhead, synonymous to Brahman, even though he was also an incarnation (in human form on this earth) of the God Vishnu.
Worshippers of Devi, the divine mother, also describe her as being the mother of the universe, giving birth to all manifest creation, which would put her on a par with Brahman and above the Trinity.
quote:
When Shiva is unmanifested, only consciousness, how then can "Shiva-energy" go down?
I think this refers to pure consciousness expanding into every cell of the body and beyond the body, merging with Shakti in the form of ecstatic love.
quote:
When Shiva is pure consciousness, why does ida,which is a channel for mental prana (manas shakti) correspond with the female principle and pingala which channels life-energy (prana shakti - see: Kundalini Tantra by Swami Satyananda Saraswati) correspomd with the male principle (mind is closer to consciousness than the life-force of the astral body, which is denser)?
Normally the three lower bodies are the physical, the vital and the mental which together form the physical aspect of the human. Above these are the pranic and causal bodies, and of course the atman. So prana is more subtle than the mind, the causal is more subtle than prana etc.
I would not take any definitions about ida and pingala too seriously. They change from text to text, and some authors even of the major hatha yoga texts disagree.
Christi |
|
|
|
AustrianYogi
Austria
31 Posts |
Posted - Oct 13 2008 : 03:56:48 AM
|
Hello!
Everything is made up of prana, only the density is different. I do not agree with Christi :
The physical body, which is made up of flesh and bones, is the densest; then comes the etheric (bioplasmatic) body, then the astral body, then the mental and last not least the causal body. This is consensus in most yoga-books.
Maybe the key for a better understanding of Shiva and Shakti as guiding principles for two polar enrgies is to give up the labels "male" and "female" and to consider that Shiva (pure consciousness) can become energy and Shakti (pure enrgy) can become consciousness. Maybe the key is to understnad pure consciousness as very, very fine enrgy, different from Brahman, which is absolute without name, form or consciousness.
In this sense the mental prana circulating in ida could be understood as enrgy being closer to the fine enrgy of consciousness; the life-energy in pingala is only denser. Prana Shakti in the root-chakra could be seen as very strong and dense energy.
Andreas |
Edited by - AustrianYogi on Oct 13 2008 07:33:10 AM |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4363 Posts |
Posted - Oct 13 2008 : 08:41:51 AM
|
Hi Andreas,
I stand corrected. The mental body is more subtle than the pranic body. All the more reason to not take those ida/pingala definitions too seriously. Maybe one day we will be able to see directly how these nadis interact with the rest of the universe and then it will all make perfect sence!
Until then...
Christi |
|
|
|
rebeq11
USA
14 Posts |
Posted - Oct 13 2008 : 11:07:50 PM
|
Hi! My comment may not be what you are looking for, but here goes. 
On further inspection of my own character, I seem to be putting more emphasis on balances in my right and left sides (possible purity of the nadis in discussion). For example, I am right-side dominant in both physical endeavors as well as emotional. The right side is supposed to be more the "go-getter" in life. The one who achieves.The talker. While the left-side is more nuturing, receptive, and better at letting go or receiving information.
I have read that "the path" leads one to become fully human before full realization occurs. I believe by being in tough with both aspects of humanity (the male and female energies or duality) that we are more apt to live in Divine Love.
As for science, I use the word. In my humble understanding it is being in touch with the feelings/observations of the body that the sympathetic verses parasympathetic nervous systems feed. Most folks live in a constant sympathetic state (stress induced with neurotransmitter release) hence they are forcing their existence or holding on to it tightly. Living in an unneeded flight or fright response. This could also be constant mental activity. It also helps one focus: this is a very good thing too! As I mentioned in studing myself, the more I let go of the feelings that the sympathetic nervous system affords me, I balance myself in the parasympathetic (natural functioning of the body) and am able to feel more bliss, ecstasy, and be loving to others, with much less mental chatter.
beck |
|
|
|
yogawriter
India
1 Posts |
Posted - May 18 2020 : 04:50:19 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by AustrianYogi
Hello and Atma Namaste from Vienna, Austria!
Concerning Shiva and Shakti, I found different explanations:
Shiva (located in the crown) is consciousness, Shakti (located at the base of the spine) is energy. In ida there is female energy, in pingala male energy. Ida conducts mental prana, pingala conducts life energy ("Prana, Pranayama, Prana Vidya" by Swami Niranjanananda Saraswati).
But when Shiva is consciousness, unmanifested, how can there be (manifested) Shive-energy? But when there is no Shiva-energy, how can the pingala-nadi be male? Or are there 2 polarities: On the one hand Shiva/Shakti and on the other hand Shakti, who becomes 2 polar enrgies in ida and pingala)?!
And when Shiva is unmanifested, which is the energy coming down and meeting Shakti in the heart?
Thank you very much in advance for your contributions.
Andreas from Vienna, Austria
As far as my knowledge goes, you have mixed up the beliefs of different ages and cults. But if you want a unified version, you can explain this way.
There are a lot of interpretations, and it would take pages to explain all, but what you should look up are the interpretations of bindu and bindu chakra, especially in context with the introduction of kundalini, interpretations of the lunar and solar energy and correspondent nadis, also involving the 2 types of bindus in some interpretations. Especially dichotomous is the fact that in some places, the lunar energy is Shiva and solar energy is shakti, which works because of the association of these gods with those celestial bodies, but other places connect lunar energy with female energy and male with solar, which is also believable because of the dynamic. So you have to decide with canon text, age, group/cult you adhere to and then keep to the beliefs of that. Otherwise, this confusion will prevail. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
Shiva and Shakti/ida and pingala -clarification
