The Serpent Power — Arthur Avalon (Sir John Woodroffe) (1924)
Recently some attention has been given to the subject in Western literature of an occult kind. Generally its authors and others have purported to give what they understood to be the Hindu theory of the matter, but with considerable inaccuracies. These are not limited to works of the character mentioned. Thus, to take but two instances of these respective classes, we find in a well-known Sanskrit dictionary³ that the Chakras are defined to be “circles or depressions (sic) of the body for mystical or chiromantic purposes,” and their location has in almost every particular been wrongly given. The Mūlādhāra is inaccurately described as being “above the
1 Kavirāja Kunjalāla Bhishagratna in his edition of the Sushruta Sanghitā. Another explanation, however, may be given—namely, that during man’s history the importance of the various perceptive centres has in fact varied.
2 According to some Indian views, the brain is the centre of the mind and senses, and the heart that of life. Charaka says that the heart is the root from which spring all other parts of the body, and is the centre of some of the functions or organs. According to Sushruta, the heart is the seat of sensations.
3 Professor Monier Williams’ Sanskrit Dictionary, sub voce “Chakra”.
p. 5
pubis”. Nor is the Svādhishthāna the umbilical region. Anāhata is not the root of the nose, but is the spinal centre in the region of the heart; Vishuddha is not “the hollow between the frontal sinuses,” but is the spinal centre in the region of the throat. Ājnā is not the fontanelle or union of the coronal and sagittal sutures, which are said to be the Brahmarandhra,¹ but is in the position allotted to the third eye, or Jnānachakshus. Others, avoiding such gross errors, are not free from lesser inaccuracies. Thus, an author who, I am informed, had considerable knowledge of things occult, speaks of the Sushumnā as a “force” which “cannot be energised until Idā and Pingalā have preceded it,” which “passes to the accompaniment of violent shock through each section of the spinal marrow,” and which on the awakening of the sacral plexus passes along the spinal cord and impinges on the brain, with the result that the neophyte finds “himself to be an unembodied soul alone in the black abyss of empty space, struggling against dread and terror unutterable”. He also writes that the “current” of Kundalinī is called Nādī; that the Sushumnā extends as a nerve to the Brahmarandhra; that the Tattvas are seven in number; and other matters which are inaccurate. The Sushumnā is not a “force,”² and does not pass and impinge upon anything, but is the outer of the three Nādīs, which form the conduit for the force which is the arousing of the Devī called Kundalinī, the cosmic Power in bodies, which force is not itself a Nādī, but passes through the innermost, or Chitrinī Nādī, which terminates at the twelve-petalled lotus below the Sahasrāra, from which ascent is made to the Brahmarandhra. It
p. 6
would be easy to point out other mistakes in writers who have referred to the subject. It will be more profitable if I make as correct a statement as my knowledge admits of this mode of Yoga. But I desire to add that some modern Indian writers have also helped to diffuse erroneous notions about the Chakras by describing them from what is merely a materialistic or physiological standpoint. To do so is not merely to misrepresent the case, but to give it away; for physiology does not know the Chakras as they exist in themselves—that is, as centres of consciousness— and of the activity of Sūkshma Prānavāyu or subtle vital force; though it does deal with the gross body which is related to them. Those who appeal to physiology only are like to return non-suited.
1 A term which is also employed to denote the Brahmanādī, in that the latter is the passage whereby the Brahmarandhra in the cerebrum is attained.
2 Except in the sense that everything is a manifestation of power.
Recently some attention has been given to the subject in Western literature of an occult kind. Generally its authors and others have purported to give what they understood to be the Hindu theory of the matter, but with considerable inaccuracies. These are not limited to works of the character mentioned. Thus, to take but two instances of these respective classes, we find in a well-known Sanskrit dictionary³ that the Chakras are defined to be “circles or depressions (sic) of the body for mystical or chiromantic purposes,” and their location has in almost every particular been wrongly given. The Mūlādhāra is inaccurately described as being “above the
1 Kavirāja Kunjalāla Bhishagratna in his edition of the Sushruta Sanghitā. Another explanation, however, may be given—namely, that during man’s history the importance of the various perceptive centres has in fact varied.
2 According to some Indian views, the brain is the centre of the mind and senses, and the heart that of life. Charaka says that the heart is the root from which spring all other parts of the body, and is the centre of some of the functions or organs. According to Sushruta, the heart is the seat of sensations.
3 Professor Monier Williams’ Sanskrit Dictionary, sub voce “Chakra”.
p. 5
pubis”. Nor is the Svādhishthāna the umbilical region. Anāhata is not the root of the nose, but is the spinal centre in the region of the heart; Vishuddha is not “the hollow between the frontal sinuses,” but is the spinal centre in the region of the throat. Ājnā is not the fontanelle or union of the coronal and sagittal sutures, which are said to be the Brahmarandhra,¹ but is in the position allotted to the third eye, or Jnānachakshus. Others, avoiding such gross errors, are not free from lesser inaccuracies. Thus, an author who, I am informed, had considerable knowledge of things occult, speaks of the Sushumnā as a “force” which “cannot be energised until Idā and Pingalā have preceded it,” which “passes to the accompaniment of violent shock through each section of the spinal marrow,” and which on the awakening of the sacral plexus passes along the spinal cord and impinges on the brain, with the result that the neophyte finds “himself to be an unembodied soul alone in the black abyss of empty space, struggling against dread and terror unutterable”. He also writes that the “current” of Kundalinī is called Nādī; that the Sushumnā extends as a nerve to the Brahmarandhra; that the Tattvas are seven in number; and other matters which are inaccurate. The Sushumnā is not a “force,”² and does not pass and impinge upon anything, but is the outer of the three Nādīs, which form the conduit for the force which is the arousing of the Devī called Kundalinī, the cosmic Power in bodies, which force is not itself a Nādī, but passes through the innermost, or Chitrinī Nādī, which terminates at the twelve-petalled lotus below the Sahasrāra, from which ascent is made to the Brahmarandhra. It
p. 6
would be easy to point out other mistakes in writers who have referred to the subject. It will be more profitable if I make as correct a statement as my knowledge admits of this mode of Yoga. But I desire to add that some modern Indian writers have also helped to diffuse erroneous notions about the Chakras by describing them from what is merely a materialistic or physiological standpoint. To do so is not merely to misrepresent the case, but to give it away; for physiology does not know the Chakras as they exist in themselves—that is, as centres of consciousness— and of the activity of Sūkshma Prānavāyu or subtle vital force; though it does deal with the gross body which is related to them. Those who appeal to physiology only are like to return non-suited.
1 A term which is also employed to denote the Brahmanādī, in that the latter is the passage whereby the Brahmarandhra in the cerebrum is attained.
2 Except in the sense that everything is a manifestation of power.
No commentary for this page.