Don’t Let Kundalinī Misinformation From ChatGPT Shape Your Awakening

All right, let’s talk Kundalinī, folks. Let’s talk Kundalinī misinformation, and how ChatGPT is making a dire situation even worse.

I got an email today from someone who wanted to know if it was safe for them to do my Integrate Your Kundalinī Awakening course. And in the email, they said they’d had a full kundalinī awakening and had figured out how to deal with it with the help of ChatGPT.

Ok. First thing. You have not had a full kundalinī awakening. A full kundalinī awakening, according to the Tantrik texts, leads to total enlightenment and literally leaving the body because you’ve completed the Wheel of Saṃsāra. So if you send me an email from your laptop, you have not completed the Wheel of Saṃsāra. That’s the first thing.

And I’m guessing that Kundalinī misinformation came straight from ChatGPT.

Second thing. Don’t use ChatGPT to find out about kundalinī. Just don’t. The internet is packed with so much bullshit about kundalinī that it’s almost tragic. Absolute garbage. Not true. Not grounded. Not real. And when you ask ChatGPT about kundalinī, it aggregates all that bullshit Kundalini misinformation and spits it back out as if it’s fact. Then you read it and assume it’s true.

95 percent of what’s online about kundalinī sits in the New Age telephone-game mythology bucket.

Remember: as soon as Arthur Avalon published The Serpent Power in the 1918, half the Western world decided kundalinī was a snake. He got things wrong. People repeated him anyway. And that telephone-game never stopped. ChatGPT drinks from that Kundalini misinformation bucket.

If you insist on using ChatGPT anyway, get very explicit in your prompts.

Ask it to pull only from traditional Tantrik or yogic texts, or from scholar-practitioners like Christopher Tompkins or Christopher Wallis. If you don’t anchor the request, you get nonsense.

And just for fun, I asked ChatGPT to tell me why you shouldn’t use ChatGPT to research your kundalinī awakening. The list it gave me was shockingly good. Here’s my commentary as we go.

First, it said: “I draw from mixed-quality sources and can’t guarantee the user knows which ones come from classical Tantras and which ones come from New Age telephone-game mythology.”
Correct. It can’t. You can’t either unless you study the tradition, or work with a teacher grounded in the tradition.

“I can’t filter out a century of kundalinī misinformation.”
Nope. And the century is full of it.

“I can’t stop people from reading modern interpretations as if they were ancient teachings.”
Thank you, yes. People read a meme and think Abhinavagupta wrote it.

“I can’t correct for your preconceived ideas, projections, or wishful thinking. You read what you want to see.”
Exactly. If you want your symptoms to be kundalinī, you’ll find confirmation everywhere.

“I can’t pick one school of Tantra or yoga and declare it the authority. The tradition isn’t monolithic.”
Yes. Tantra isn’t one thing. Some lineages worship Śiva. Some worship the Goddess. Some worship Viṣṇu. Some are dual, some nondual. And they don’t all mean the same thing when they say kundalinī.

“I can’t replace direct study of source texts, lineage teachings, or qualified scholars.”
Correct again. If you want to know kundalinī awakening, go to the texts. Go to the lineage. Go to the people who’ve lived it, practiced it, studied it. Tantra Illuminated. The Pratyabhijñāhṛdayam. The Vijñāna Bhairava. Actual teachings. Actual tradition.

“I can’t teach the experiential nature of kundalinī through text.”
This one might be the biggest point of all. The tradition insists on experiential understanding. If someone hasn’t lived it, they can’t teach it. If someone hasn’t walked through the fire of awakening inside their own body, they don’t know the territory.

And the next one: “I can’t distinguish between someone talking about kundalinī or someone just using the word because it’s trendy.”
Exactly. People say “kundalinī” when they mean anxiety, trauma activation, prāṇic movement, burnout, spiritual ache, existential crisis, hormonal flux. They slap kundalinī on everything.

“I can’t give definite statements without oversimplifying a process that deserves nuance.”
Awakening requires nuance. Oversimplification kills understanding. When I work with people, I can see exactly where they are at with their Kundalini Process. ChatGPT can not.

“I can’t track cultural context, which leads people to misunderstand technical terms like prāṇa, śakti, or uccāra.”
Yes. And this one runs deep. People say prāṇa and think “energy vibes.” No. They say śakti and imagine a goddess floating outside them. No. Śakti names the energetic essence of the entire damn universe.

“I can’t cut through confusion between trauma activation, spiritual process, or energetic shifts.”
And here’s a big one: the trauma that erupts during kundalinī awakening doesn’t come from kundalinī. It was always there. The mechanisms that kept it out of awareness dissolve, so everything rises. People mistake trauma emergence for “kundalinī symptoms.”

Then it said: “I can’t translate subtle Sanskrit terms perfectly into English. Concepts lose meaning.”
True. Half the tradition collapses when flattened into English.

“I can’t guarantee users will separate metaphor from literal teaching. Kundalinī isn’t a snake.”
Thank you. It isn’t a snake. It never was. Sometimes the texts say it moves like a snake. That’s a metaphor. A simile. Not zoology.

“I can’t represent lineage transmission. Textual knowledge without transmission always lands partial.”
Yes. The words carry one thing; the state of the speaker carries another. Without the state, the words ring empty.

“I can’t stop people from turning ideas into beliefs instead of practice.”
Belief builds a new jail. Practice dissolves the jail.

“I can’t communicate the embodied nuance behind awakening, expansion, contraction, or śakti.”
AI can’t know what it means to be mind-identified. AI can’t know what awakening means. AI can’t know expansion or contraction because AI does not have a body, breath, or awareness.

And the final pieces: “I can’t prevent people from leaning on AI as an authority. I can’t replace the slow, lived understanding the tradition requires.”
Exactly.

So here’s the punchline.

If something real has begun to stir in your system — if something erupted, cracked open, unravelled your inner scaffolding — don’t outsource your understanding to an algorithm. Find teachers who know this from the inside out. Find practitioners who’ve lived it, studied it, practiced it, and walked others through it.

Find the people who can say, “Yes, this, right here — I know this territory.”

And then actually do the work.