Liber E-Pranayama
-
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
Pranayama Question:
I have allergies that keep me moderately congested most of the time at this time of year. I regularly use Afrin prior to practice, but given the amount of practice I need to do, the limit to this easy solution is near. However, I am usually clear in one nostril or the other, and the congestion seems to switch sides throughout the day.
Is it dangerous or counterproductive to perform pranayama on one side only, provided that you perform an equal amount on the other side some time afterwards. ( later the same day, or the next day, perhaps.)
Thanks to all.
Love is the law, love under will.
-
@jlpugh said
"Is it dangerous or counterproductive to perform pranayama on one side only, provided that you perform an equal amount on the other side some time afterwards. ( later the same day, or the next day, perhaps.)"
This would vary with the individual and the circumstance. However, a single excellent practice session of this sort potentially could open one channel of the prana flow without the opposite. In general, they should be balanced as one goes.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
"Is pranayama's main purpose to activate kundalini?"That's one purpose (or, rather, can be). I don't know that it's the main purpose. - I suppose I'd say the main purpose is that this practice ultimately (for various reasons) increases your capacity to meditate."
I have a question :
For Dharana, could sensory deprivation be a better prep for this than pranayama is?
Habits, particularily bad thought habits and obsessions are related to cellular addictions to certain kinds of bio-chemical reactions, aswel as conditioning mainly resulting from the repeated exposure to non-ideal stimulation. Because these are some of the main blocks to a more free and fluent Dharana, I feel in my case at least, that meditation capacity increases most when someone can go on for the longest time in single minded focus and self-control of all of the mind without any kind of distraction. Now if such non-ideal thought-habit / sympathetic disorder follow the same general mechanics of a drug-addiction, breaking ''cold turkey'' style might be a faster way to reach a no-mind kind of state, even down to subconscious and unconscious levels.
If someone wants to completely clean and control their mind and their thoughts, I believe it would be easier to do this if they spent a few days with no talking, no TV, no music, nothing or as little as possible in each daily event, then after these days sat down to practice Dharana, it would be allot easier than
:
if they did pranayama each day before, but their day was also noisey, stressful, overly busy, overstimulated by mass media and unnecissary idle chatter compulsions with fellows, then after all of that daily noise + the sessions of pranayama, tried to just sit down and do a really good session of Dharana practice, it would be harder to focus and organize the thought than if the person had some days of sensory deprivation before, instead of a mix of pranayama and noise.Simply doing nothing [for the purpose of the mental cleaning], would be better for the mind's harmony and emptiness than would a stressful and disruptive day mixed with pranayama.
Sensory bombardment leaves scars and holes and dents. So much damned noise every day after day, numbs the subliminal and pollutes it, conditioning subtle yet highly numerous traumas, addictions and loops. - Breath practice, without avoidance of the sensory poisoning, would be almost futile.
That is what I mean when I say "sensory deprivation" in this context. The avoidance of the sickening bombardments of daily mundane "living", so that more mental resources are freed, and brought into the stillness of peace and neutrality, from which they could more strongly and easily flow into a Dharana practice or any other mind oriented meditation.
To deprive the sense-cells of the poison of the outer noise, would eventually result in the breaking of certain sensory addictions subconsciously formed by first the world and then after that, by the addictions maintained by uncontrollable automatic unnecissary fantasies, worries, memories, etc. Sympathetic disorder of thought caused by a constant flow of unnecissary random stimulations, causing many miniture traumas, resulting in uncontrolled and unnecissary thought, impeeding Dharana.
I felt like that issue cannot be faced by pranayama alone, that sufficient measures of solitude and prolonged silence are perhaps even more important than all of the pranayama.
But I wonder what your comment would be on this idea?
Or, anyone else's comments would be interesting aswel on this issue. -
@Dannerz said
"For Dharana, could sensory deprivation be a better prep for this than pranayama is?"
Your use of "could" limits me to the answer, "Of course, anything is at least possible."
But, while there is some overlap between what these two things accomplish, they really don't do the same things. One doesn't replace the other.
"I feel in my case at least, that meditation capacity increases most when someone can go on for the longest time in single minded focus and self-control of all of the mind without any kind of distraction."
Yes. That's the basic point of Dharana practice.
"If someone wants to completely clean and control their mind and their thoughts, I believe it would be easier to do this if they spent a few days with no talking, no TV, no music, nothing or as little as possible in each daily event, then after these days sat down to practice Dharana, it would be allot easier than"
That's why retreat environments work, and why the highest operations counsel significant changes from normal life circumstances. But in the West, our challenge is to be able to do this work - at least, most of the time - in the mix of our lives, while carrying on quite the opposite most of the time.
That is, Eastern culture historically has made more allowances for living a life ideally suited to meditation. But the West has a dharma more heavily invested in the world - Karma Yoga is more characteristic of the spiritual path in the West. And the training methods have been created to take into consideration that you are being (or becoming) a highly effective individual making a significant personal and professional impact on the world, improving yourself professionally and in other ways, progressively taking on more and more, multi-tasking, heavily plugged in, concerned with relationships and family - and yet still, more or less every day, persevering in spiritual practices.
Does it have to be that way? No. It's part of one's yama, to work out the conditions within one's circumstances that are optimum for one's practice. But the training needs to accomodate this, because we refuse to draw a line between those who live a spiritual life and those who life a worldly life.
To put it another way: The normal course in, say, the A.'.A.'. training would be based on daily practices essentially all the time, year in and year out - building skills, keeping them in shape, etc. You can't do the prep you recommend before each practice period if you're practicing 6 days a week, 52 weeks a year, and carrying on your job, family, whatever concurrently. - OTOH a periodic retreat, and especially changed circumstances leading up to and during the most important operations, seems virtually a requirement.
"if they did pranayama each day before, but their day was also noisey, stressful, overly busy, overstimulated by mass media and unnecissary idle chatter compulsions with fellows, then after all of that daily noise + the sessions of pranayama, tried to just sit down and do a really good session of Dharana practice, it would be harder to focus and organize the thought than if the person had some days of sensory deprivation before, instead of a mix of pranayama and noise."
Agreed. But "harder" doesn't mean it can't be done. Because it is such a physical practice, it does help break through those conditions. (And one can argue easily that people living the kind of life you describe need something like breath work to bring them back to center.
"Simply doing nothing [for the purpose of the mental cleaning], would be better for the mind's harmony and emptiness than would a stressful and disruptive day mixed with pranayama."
I'm not sure why you're arguing in this either-or sense. The pranayama should be part of it regardless. - Regarding the sentence immediately above, I would ask how (other than being independently wealthy and fairly withdrawn from the world) one could follow your plan day in and out, week in and out.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"I'm not sure why you're arguing in this either-or sense. The pranayama should be part of it regardless."
I did not mean to make it sound like an either-or case.
I agree pranayama and other yoga should be a part of it regardless, and that one cannot replace the other.Thankyou for your patient reply.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"That is, Eastern culture historically has made more allowances for living a life ideally suited to meditation. But the West has a dharma more heavily invested in the world - Karma Yoga is more characteristic of the spiritual path in the West. And the training methods have been created to take into consideration that you are being (or becoming) a highly effective individual making a significant personal and professional impact on the world, improving yourself professionally and in other ways, progressively taking on more and more, multi-tasking, heavily plugged in, concerned with relationships and family - and yet still, more or less every day, persevering in spiritual practices......The pranayama should be part of it regardless..."
This has always puzzled me because just about every Western Mystery Tradition author, prime examples being, Paul Foster Case and Dion Fortune, not to mention, most Theosophical writings, warn against the danger of the average aspirant in the West practicing pranayama. Their argument always seems to be, in large part, based on their opinion that these techniques are, as you also mention above, much more suitable to the life style and spiritual environment of Eastern aspirants. Crowley is just about the only acknowledged authority of the Western Tradition who places such a large emphasis on pranayama, insisting, as you do also, "...that pranayama should be a part of it regardless". I can't help but always remember that both Crowley and Regardie (another adept who espoused pranayama practice) both suffered from asthma. Could this in any way be connected with their practices in pranayama technique?
This has always been a concern to me and a sticking point, preventing me from fully embracing the training methods as outlined by The Master Therion. I've always loved the philosophical and highly inspirational teachings of Thelema as put forth in Liber L and the other Thelemic Holy Books but have never been able to overcome the personal reticence I have towards pranayama being a valid training method for me personally. Maybe, this is just an extreme example of my fairly conservative personality and a completely personal bias? I guess, my question would be, is it wise for someone who has these doubts to attempt any pranayama practice in the hopes of overcoming a personal stumbling block or should I be concerned that this attitude of reluctance and reticence could possibly trigger any adverse physical, mental, or spiritual effects from pranayama practice?
Any insights on these matters would be appreciated.
93 93/93
-
@RegentLynx said
"just about every Western Mystery Tradition author, prime examples being, Paul Foster Case and Dion Fortune, not to mention, most Theosophical writings, warn against the danger of the average aspirant in the West practicing pranayama."
I also am puzzled that P.F. Case advises against pranayama. (I don't recall that he warns about its being dangerous; I get the impression he just considered it a waste of time.) Case practiced pranayama assiduously for a time, so he certainly knew about its effects first-hand. He was also a close associate of William Atkinson ("Yogi Ramacharaka"), who published one of the first books in English about pranayama, The Science of Breath.
I guess the way to look at it is that some people tried it and rave about it, while others found it lacking, just as some people rave about water skiing and others couldn't be bothered.
-
@gmugmble said
"I also am puzzled that P.F. Case advises against pranayama. (I don't recall that he warns about its being dangerous; I get the impression he just considered it a waste of time.)"
No. He quite specifically considered it dangerous. - But it wasn't pranayama per se, it was pranayama other than under the direct supervision of a genuinely qualified and experienced teacher.
This is easier to trace if you watch his various writings, his correspondence, and his early courses through the '20s through '40s. As best I can piece together, Case practiced "pranayama from books" - partly, if not entirely, Liber E - in the WW I era and got some extreme results from which it took him many months to recover. This then led to his repeated recommendation concerning Crowley that people should "run not walk" to read his books and assimilate his theory, but that one should not, from the same books, attempt any of the practices - and that the practices themselves should be undertaken only under the direct supervision and instruction of a genuine master of the subject.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"No. He quite specifically considered it dangerous. - But it wasn't pranayama per se, it was pranayama other than under the direct supervision of a genuinely qualified and experienced teacher.
... the practices themselves should be undertaken only under the direct supervision and instruction of a genuine master of the subject."And what is your opinion on this? Would you recommend that a person without direct supervision not attempt the practices of Liber E?
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"No. He quite specifically considered it dangerous. - But it wasn't pranayama per se, it was pranayama other than under the direct supervision of a genuinely qualified and experienced teacher."
Yes, without quoting exact BOTA lesson material, this is exactly how I interpreted some of his various warnings. I too would be interested in knowing to what extent you feel these warnings should be heeded. Specifically, what would be the safest beginning practice(s) for a complete novice in pranayama who does not have ready access to a qualified teacher of Yogic disciplines?
93 93/93
-
@RegentLynx said
"I too would be interested in knowing to what extent you feel these warnings should be heeded. Specifically, what would be the safest beginning practice(s) for a complete novice in pranayama who does not have ready access to a qualified teacher of Yogic disciplines?"
Witnessing the breath is safe. So is non-forced rhythmic breathing of the 3-fold or 4-fold breath variety.
If you're going to get much more heavily into it, then the least you should do IMHO is to have personal access to someone who knows about this stuff and report any significant phenomena as they occur.
-
Thanks for your clear, succinct answer.
93 93/93
-
I can second Case. The first thing is to do asanas to be able to do a pranayama suited sitting asana.
I jumped into pranayama with a bad sitting asana, my back bent, my knees badly put and in the end that disbalanced my body a lot. So now I'm doing asanas to get it straight.
Anyway pranayama was worthwhile because of the calmness, colour enchanting effect. Btw do the practice with yogic breath NOT normal breath - it makes it more easy.
And don't strech - in 10 min or so it gets harder to breathe. -
@Modes said
"pranayama was worthwhile because of the[...]colour enchanting effect."
I have noted this phenomenon as well...sort of like iridescent oil on water that blooms & recedes like rainbow clouds...
616
-
Do and see for yourself.
Yogic breath @ Ashtanga yoga @ youtube.com. Breath in lower belly, upper belly, lungs. Breath out - lungs, upper belly, lower belly (after that you can do the belly bandha aka lock). Knowledge about bandhas is also good, well because, as i understand it, while doing pranayama they can be used to advantage - especialy the mula bandha. That's why I'm planing to invest into siddhasana.
Just do your yoga homework - it's of great benefit. -
Thank you. The phrase "yogic breathing" might have meant different things to different people, and I just wondered what it meant to you. Now I know.
@Modes said
"Do and see for yourself."
Yes, I continue to do, and maybe someday I shall see something. My experience to date with yoga, meditation, and ritual practices has been that I see nothing. I don't have peak experiences or anomalous sensory phenomena, or see angels or flaming stars or sylphs, or experience synchronicities or psychometric hunches or clairvoyant foreknowledge, or feel centered or grounded or empowered or at peace. I just get sore ankles. Maybe my life is to be an object lesson in avoiding the lust of result. Maybe this is why I am always asking people on these fora to detail their experiences. I'm a spiritual voyeur; I seek vicarious validation. But I continue to do; I will do my homework; and maybe I will make a greater effort to find a flesh-and-blood teacher.
Regarding color effects, I found this in Christina and Stan Grof's Stormy Search for the Self: "The sensory manifestations of Kundalini awakening can be very rich and varied. People ... often describe colorful visions of beautiful geometrical patterns, brilliant lights of supernatural beauty, and complex scenes of deities, demons, and saints." Is this what we're talking about?
-
Well get some good yoga teacher to look at your asana. Doing yoga asanas could help to get your legs into shape. If you have read my posts in this thread you know I did 10/20 30min pranayama every morning. For how long do you do it?
Lust for result kills. I just sit and do because anything else is of no importance to me. I don't give a about anything just sit, do, write results.
No, no visions just a more vivid sight. Ever seen fractals (mathematics)? Look at a tree - so beautyful..
Just practice with care. -
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
Every once in a while I am tempted to ask whether or not some results are normal, as though it matters. Sometimes the temptation is too great:
For the past month or so whenever I practice Pranayama, an overwhelming sensation of peace and serenity washes over me during inhalation, in as few as two cycles. The words "peace" and "serenity," because of their meanings, do not seem powerful enough here. It is like being hit over the head with a large brick of peace and serenity. It's kind of neat, but I'm a little reticent because it feels a lot like I'm getting high.
So, for those who are experienced with these things, is this a stumbling block destined to distract, or a nice little bonus of the practice?
Just FYI background, I'm doing 17/17/17. I sweat a little (but I live in the desert), no rigidity, no other obvious effects.
Love is the law, love under will.