Talk:Khecarī mudrā

Untitled
I believe this article can well gel with the article 'Khecharimudra' for which a request was provided —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.122.31.14 (talk • contribs)


 * When two terms have the same meaning, we create a redirect from one term to the other. I've redirected Khecharimudra to here. — Omegatron 00:48, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I moved page with explaination of meaning. Lara_bran 03:28, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Etymology
I was asked to examine an etymology question. I am not familiar with the use of this term in yoga, and the current romanization in the article may not be correct. I looked up the most likely term in Apte based on what the article says it means. According to Apte's The Practical Sanskrit-English Dictionary, p. 389, the compound ख + चर (IAST: + ) used as an adjective means "flying, moving in the air", which is a literal translation of those words. The noun form खचर: (IAST: ), also spelled खेचरः, has ten possible meanings:

"-1. a bird. -2. a cloud. -3. the sun. -4. the wind. -5. a demon. -6. an aerial spirit. -7. a Gandharva or . -8. a planet. -9. mercury or quicksilver. -10. a sign of the zodiac."

For the feminine form खेचरी (IAST: ) Apte lists an additional two meanings:

"-1. a semi-divine female able to fly. -2. an epithet of Durgā."

Note that a similar construction खगः (IAST: ) is given as the simple translation for English "bird" in p. 35 of Apte's The Student's English-Sanskrit Dictionary. (This also literally means "sky-going").

Apte does not mention its use a a technical term in yoga, so I am trying to find a more specific reference. Sanskrit words often have multiple meanings like this, and determining the meaning in a technical context often requires consultation of a context-specific source. The article implies that the feminine form is being used, but I still need to see a yoga-specific source. The IAST romanization is the preferred method within the Hinduism project. Buddhipriya 06:06, 24 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I have found multiple listings of the phrase  in the index to David Gordon White's The Alchemical Body: Siddha Traditions in Medieval India, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1996, ISBN 0-226-89499-1. I will read what he has to say about the term, but it is clear that the correct IAST is as he gives it there. Buddhipriya 06:21, 24 August 2007 (UTC)


 * White (p. 150) describes an alchemical operation in which the word ' is used as a technical term for the element "ether" (but also mica), and that "as with the hathayogic practice of ', this operation climaxes with ether in the cranial vault." This is an example of a technical meaning for the word that in this case differs from the ordinary dictionary definitions.  I would not be surprised if we find additional etymology issues in other sources. Buddhipriya 06:48, 24 August 2007 (UTC)


 * On p. 252 White translates the phrase  as "the seal of moving in the ether". Buddhipriya 06:56, 24 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks Buddhipriya - that seems the most descriptive of the practice, and shares common themes (flying, air, ether) with other translations and uses (Sivananda, Bernard, and others). &#2384; Priyanath talk 20:15, 25 August 2007 (UTC)


 * On p. 487, note 218, White mentions that " is also the term employed by a suborder, the, for the cylinders of wood which they pass through their earlobes." Buddhipriya 07:03, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
 * whatever but its khechari, not kechari. Its like bird like toungue guesture. only 1 of those 10 meanings has a toungue. i have no more comments to make regard as move is justified. thanks. Lara_bran 09:19, 24 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Please familiarize yourself with the IAST method of romanization for Sanskrit, which is the standard for articles that use Sanskrit terms. In the IAST method, the Devanagari character च is romanized as "ca", not "cha".  This is a common confusion regarding the romanization.  The character that IAST romanizes as "cha" is छ, which is the aspirated form of च.  They are entirely different letters in the Devanagari alphabet.  The first character in the compound is the letter ख, which in IAST is the aspirate "kha".  The vowel mark above it (खे) gives it the IAST rendering "khe".


 * Your comment that it is a "bird like toungue guesture" has absolutely nothing to do with any of the sourced material above, and appears to be WP:OR. Please read WP:V regarding the need to cite souces when making assertions such as that. Buddhipriya 20:16, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Problems with sourcing
While adding the correct spelling of the term I noticed that the existing references all lack page numbers, making them very difficult to verify. To clean this up all of the named references pointing to an entire book need to be replaced with individual references that have page numbers. If the references cannot be made more specific, they are candidates for removal. Buddhipriya 06:40, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Only inline citations need to be page numbered. removing source may be considered as vandalism. Lara_bran 09:18, 24 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but you are wrong. If a reference cannot be verified, it may be removed.  See: WP:V.  Vague references to entire books do not constitute verifiable references.  An appropriate intermediate step when challenging a vague reference would be to add a request for a page number to the vague reference.  If none can be supplied, I would remove the vague reference as unverifiable.  Buddhipriya 20:04, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Khechari mudra > Khecari mudra
Since page moves are usually disruptive and controversial, I'm bringing this here before moving. It appears that the correct romanization is 'Khecari' mudra. This article began at 'Kechari' mudra, and was moved to its current 'Khechari' mudra. Perhaps the third time's a charm? White and Flood both use 'Khecari', and so does Bernard (this may be a chance to actually use the Bernard book as a source/reference here....). If there are no objections, I'll move this page after a couple of days. &#2384; Priyanath talk 17:36, 25 August 2007 (UTC)


 * The correct romanization is  and I would prefer to see the correct IAST used in the title. Note that recently in the Hinduism project we have been seeing a trend toward more use of IAST in article titles, which I support.  For recent examples see Mahābhārata and Svādhyāya.  Redirects can be used for the various simple English versions, sending them to the correct IAST title. Buddhipriya 19:59, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * On the other hand, in saying the above I realized that so far the only source that I have personally seen with the correct IAST is White. In an ideal world I would try to find at least a second reference for the IAST.  I will look again and see if I can get a second source in the next couple of days.  If there is no rush for the page move, I would suggest waiting a few days to ensure we have full input. Buddhipriya 20:18, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I found the term ' listed in the Glossary of N. N. Bhattacharyya's History of the Tantric Religion, p. 407, defined as follows: "'. Name of Yogic posture which bestows spiritual attainment and enables one to overcome disease and death. ', III. 1-3; ', III. 67. It is required for the meditation of . , 14-16."


 * Bhattacharyya also gives a glossary entry on p. 407 for the term ' that is useful for understanding the term in this context: "'. Same as Kauliki-Śakti. Kha denotes brahman, and that power which moves (cara) as the kinetic energy of brahman is known (as) . Though one and undifferentiated it is manifested in numerous forms. ', p. 30."  this reference is useful because it establishes that the term  uses a long vowel at the end as part of its own usage, so it is not there simply as an artifact of the compound within which it appears.  That is, the noun itself is '  and not .  This makes sense to me if the concept is conceptualized as a type of, but I am ignorant of this specific tradition. Buddhipriya 20:42, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Here is the citation for Bhattacharyya, which is a well-known reference text on the subject:


 * Second Revised Edition


 * Buddhipriya 20:39, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you Buddhipriya - that helps a great deal, for the article and for my own understanding. I can wait on the page move, and trust your judgment and sourcing. The translation in the context of  is interesting. In my own tradition, is an extremely effective practice for awakening and directing  - in this case as the inner active energy, as opposed to  as Goddess. The 'flying' and 'moving in the ether' are just stylistic ways of describing the effects of  - again in my tradition and experience. Not exactly encyclopedic, I understand, but it may explain the various ways that this one concept is described. &#2384; Priyanath talk 21:36, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Please point me to wikipedia policy that shates cha and ca. Thanks. Lara_bran 06:09, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * oppose. in english see many words; change, chargesheet, chose all have ch. ISAT has nothing to do with wikipedia, no policy says ISAT should be followed. Lara_bran 09:10, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * 1. WP:RS's (see above) transliterate 'Khecari Mudra' from sanskrit without the second 'h'. These authorities are using the letter 'h' in other contexts, so they are not part of some extremist anti-h movement, which would be abhorrent and would also violate WP:No personal attacks :-).
 * 2. WP:CON.
 * 3. Naming conventions (Indic) states, among other relevant guidelines: "The preferred formal transliteration is the standardised ISO 15919 transliteration scheme for Indic scripts. This system uses the Latin alphabet (the Roman script) with additional diacritic symbols to represent Indic scripts accurately. For Sanskrit, IAST is preferred, which differs from ISO 15919 only in a very few points." &#2384; Priyanath talk 15:00, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Please note that those conventions are for producing different language font. NOT for title. First understand this difference. When producing devanagari font ISAT or ISO should be used, this has nothing to do with title of the page. Thanks. Lara_bran 04:12, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * See Chandra etc. should it be moved to Candra? ISAT is used only to produce font output, but not for titles. Im done with this article, bye. Lara_bran 09:34, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Lara, I don't think you will get much support for your view that IAST is not the prevailing standard for romanization of Sanskrit in academia, and that it is the prevailing standard within the Hinduism project. Please note that the IAST version is the one that appears in the sources I have been citing, and if necessary I will cite more that use IAST.  I have found the term in two additional sources so far.  Buddhipriya 06:15, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Additional citations
I am finding it quite easy to locate more citations to this, and each one gives a slightly enriched understanding of the term in context. Here is one related to use within the traditions of Kashmir Shaivism. In the "Glossary of Technical Terms" (p. 242) of Singh, Jaideva (1979), Śiva Sūtras, Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi, ISBN 81-208-0407-4, we find three different terms listed:
 * ": Sub-species of ', connected with the ', the empirical self; is one that moves in Kha or the vast expanse of consciousness."
 * ": The  or group of the that move in the expanse of consciousness of the empirical subject."
 * ": The bliss of the vast expanse of spiritual consciousness, also known as ' or ' (the state of Śivā)." Buddhipriya 06:43, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

There is a scriptural citation for the term where the term is used in verse II.5 of the Śiva Sūtras, p. 99 in Singh (1979). This citation is useful because it gives us the Devanagari for the term, which eliminates all question about the romanization accuracy. Verse II.5 reads विद्यासमुत्थाने सवाभाविके खेचरी शिवावस्था, which Singh translates as "On the emergence of spontaneous supreme knowledge, occurs that state of movement in the vast unlimited expanse of consciousness which is Śiva state i.e. the Supreme State of Reality." Also on p. 99 he gives the specific translation of खेचरी as "moving in the vast expanse of consciousness". Singh gives various other comments on the term in the commentary pp. 100-101. In the "Notes" section (pp. 101-102) he says:

"'': This literally means that which moves in the sky or empty space. Kha or empty space is a symbol of consciousness. One of the meanings of Khecara is '.  ', therefore, means a ' pertaining to  or  as the above  puts it.'"

" is that particular disposition of the psychophysical posture which enables the experient to move freely in the expanse of consciousness. "

"' is of various sorts. ' does not set any store by ' in the sense of disposition of certain parts of the physical body. It interprets ' in a higher sense in three ways, viz. (1) mudam (harṣam) rati (dadāti) — that which give muda or joy, (2) muṃ drāvayati — that which dissolves mu or bondage (3) mudrayati iti — that which seals up (the universe into turīya).... That which enables living beings to acquire Self-realization in all the states of the embodied ones is '.... So ' in ' means a state of universal consciousness which is the state of '".

I think this last comment is of particular interest because of the more general definition of  in which it is identified more with an end state of consciousness than with a physical body position, which may be used as a means to that end. Buddhipriya 07:15, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I have confirmed that खचर (Khacara) appears as a name of Shiva in the Shiva Sahasranama, translated by Ram Karan Sharma as "One who moves in the space (also the inner space of heart)". Note that this is a masuline form of the name. See: p. 281,. Buddhipriya 07:28, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks again, Buddhipriya. All of that information really is interesting to someone who practices . I don't know the best way to incorporate all this into the article. You must have a good idea of whose would be the most authoritative interpretation(s). I'm willing to give it a try when I have the time. And I suppose this means we can move the article to ? &#2384; Priyanath talk 01:35, 30 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I have no plan to do further work on this since the initial question was simply to check the etymology. The overall impression I get is that the term is used in different senses by different authors.  Regarding the page name, personally I support the use of IAST in article titles, and thus would support  as the name.  However opinions about the use of IAST in article titles vary, and this may be an opportunity to ask a wider group of people what their current thinking is on the issue.  Perhaps some of the other regular editors on Hinduism articles could be consulted. I keep track of some of the IAST-related threads at User:Buddhipriya/IASTUsage, which summarizes my current understanding of policies that pertain to IAST.  I would say that there is no clear prevailing policy on it at the moment, as there are conflicting practices.  In particular see: Naming_conventions_%28use_English%29. Buddhipriya 21:35, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for all your help, Buddhipriya. Since is a technical sanskrit term, I've gone ahead with the bolder approach and moved the page to . &#2384; Priyanath talk 01:51, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * See WP:BRD. It is english wikipedia, c instead of ch is not at all acceptable. Also problem that such characters not available on keyboard, so cntr+F does not work. Lara_bran 06:10, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Opinion of James Randi
On the subject of being taught this mudra, in his An Encyclopedia of Claims, Frauds, and Hoaxes of the Occult and Supernatural, skeptic James Randi writes of

"...tasting “divine nectar” when the head was thrown back with the tongue turned inward, and receiving a mantra nonsense word. The sensory illusions were quite natural and easily understood physiological phenomena, the “nectar” being simply nasal secretions dripping into the throat. Only the very naive were convinced that they had been let in on some sort of celestial secret."

What is the opinion of editors here on including Randi's opinion in this article? (I am acting as Devil's Advocate here.) Rumiton (talk) 13:38, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the discussion was to move the article.

Requested move
Support See discussion above under "Khechari mudra > Khecari mudra" for explanation. Page was formerly at "Khecarī mudrā", but was moved back by now banned editor. I tried moving it back to the correct "Khecarī mudrā", but couldn't, so it needs an administrator. ~ priyanath talk 05:13, 27 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Oppose. This is a term known in Enflish.  Thre is no "romanizing" for Wikipedians to be doing; it has already been done.  Unless you can show the other version is at least roughly as common in English as "khechari mudra" is, there is no real question to be considered here.  Gene Nygaard (talk) 15:56, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

That's where I stood, too, until Buddhipriya (above) showed that the relevant academic works (in English, no less!) that discuss use the correct spelling. I now agree with him, that Khecarī mudrā is the correct, and encyclopedic, version.
 * 1.". Name of Yogic posture which bestows spiritual attainment and enables one to overcome disease and death."
 * Second Revised Edition


 * 2. Naming conventions (Indic) states, among other relevant guidelines: "The preferred formal transliteration is the standardised ISO 15919 transliteration scheme for Indic scripts. This system uses the Latin alphabet (the Roman script) with additional diacritic symbols to represent Indic scripts accurately. For Sanskrit, IAST is preferred, which differs from ISO 15919 only in a very few points."
 * 3. See recent examples such as Mahābhārata, Svādhyāya, Śruti, Cārvāka and more.
 * 4. We should use what is academically and encyclopedically correct. ~ priyanath talk 18:30, 29 January 2008 (UTC)


 * No. We should use what is generally used in English, when things are well known in English. That is our basic WP:naming conventions rule.  Gene Nygaard (talk) 14:12, 30 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Here are a few more examples, showing that this is increasingly becoming standard practice. Note that many of this small sample also have commonly mistranslated English versions that are equally unencyclopedic: Samādhi, Kālī, Patañjali, Sūtra, Jyotiṣa, Darśana, Vipassanā, Tripiṭaka, Cārvāka, Śīla, Bṛhaspati, Avalokiteśvara, Brāhmī script, Pratītyasamutpāda, Karuṇā, Kharoṣṭhī, Caṛdī kalā, Vaṇḍ chakkō, Candrakīrti, Kirat karō, Mahāsāṃghika, Taṇhā, Aśvaghoṣa, Ardās. ~ priyanath talk 01:34, 5 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Support. Since it is not widely used as English, the IAST transliteration is fine and is more encyclopedic. —   AjaxSmack   08:10, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Failed verification: Essence of Self-Realization (Kriyananda, Swami)
I looked at the linked book and did not find the info or quote for which it is cited. It's not on page 173, and the search function finds no mention of Kechari Mudra in the book. I looked through the book on a different site and found no supporting material. Can anyone comment? Perception312 (talk) 19:00, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
 * We have to assume that the editor who added the reference saw it in the book even though we cannot verify it online. I did however correct the reference information.Red Rose 13 (talk) 05:53, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Okay, I saw your edits and corrected the author name, but isn't there still a problem here? I'm not making assumptions about the editor who added it. Mistakes happen. But if we can access the book online, look at the cited page, and see that there is no supporting info, isn't that grounds for removing the source and the material it was supposed to support? Perception312 (talk) 14:12, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes but did you also search the book for the term? Sometimes different editions have different page numbers for the words you are looking for. If you did search the term and the info does not match what is written on the wiki page, then yes we need to remove it.Red Rose 13 (talk) 16:17, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I searched through the book using search terms like "mudra" and "tongue" and found no mention of the mudra, and I searched for the quote used and found no results. I'm glad we agree. Perception312 (talk) 16:32, 1 July 2023 (UTC)