Do you think, and if so why, it is helpful to give them a name, chakras, that is so much associated with the esoteric* Indian mystical beliefs? Why not understand clearly, without the hocus-pocus and therefore be able to keep the physical and psychological aspects of the whole human better understood and better maintained, rather than split it into mystic bits and actual bits? Now, some wil suk in their teeth and think that to say this is Sacrilegious or some sort of insult, but of course that is not so. Use the word chakras, yes, but with comprehension, not with the woo overtones.Quote
The chakras, IMO, relate to the entire self, analogous to how psychological health can effect health of the entire body.
The nervous system is definitely a key element.
Chakras are supposed to be: ‘of the subtle body not the physical body, and connected by energy channels called Nadi'. Can you define any of those without indicating that they are ideas and beliefs? – Wikipedia doesn’t seem to, but I might have missed it!
Therefore, definitely intended to ex clude those who will not buy in to the mystic, entirely subjective ideas of its proponents. It is the distinguishing between the fact and the fiction that is, to me, the most important thing.Quote
intended for or likely to be understood by only a small number of people with a specialized knowledge or interest.
/and I think I'll close this post by saying that we haven't evolved chakras, we have evolved as we are and anybody taking apart and microscopically examining us will not find one.
Edited to correct tags ... and my name!
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10-Dec-17 14:50 by Susan Doris.