The Rainbow That Was Invented

In 1918, a judge of the Calcutta High Court was finishing a book that would carry the chakras out of Sanskrit and into the modern imagination. His name was Sir John Woodroffe, and he wrote on Indian tantra under the pen-name Arthur Avalon. The next year, 1919, he published The Serpent Power, an English translation of Purnananda’s sixteenth-century Sat-chakra-nirupana, with the Sanskrit commentary and a long introduction. It is the book this treatise has leaned on at every gate, because it is the channel through which the classical system reached the West.

Here is the irony that the whole story turns on. Woodroffe translated the tradition faithfully, colours and elements and deities and all, and he openly criticised the people who were already beginning to distort it. The faithful version came first. The rainbow came after, and it came from somewhere else.

The clairvoyant who added the colours

That somewhere else was the Theosophical Society. In 1927, eight years after Woodroffe, a Theosophist named Charles Webster Leadbeater published a book called The Chakras. It is, more than any other single source, the origin of the chart on the studio wall.

Leadbeater did not read the colours off the Sanskrit texts. He said he saw them. His method, stated in his own book, was clairvoyance: he described the chakras as glowing, spinning vortices of force that he claimed to perceive directly with inner sight, and he painted them in vivid colours and tied them to the body’s endocrine glands. The gland associations that fill modern chakra books, the adrenals at the root, the thyroid at the throat, the pineal at the crown, substantially begin here, with Leadbeater, in 1927. They are not in Purnananda. They are not in Woodroffe’s translation of Purnananda. They are the report of a twentieth-century clairvoyant overlaid on a sixteenth-century text.

This is worth stating without contempt and without credulity. Leadbeater believed he saw what he described. Whether he did is a question outside the scope of this treatise. What is inside its scope is the plain historical fact: the colours and the glands entered the system in 1927, from a source that did not claim to be transmitting the Sanskrit tradition, and that in important respects departed from it.

The spectrum bolted on

Leadbeater’s colours were vivid, and they were not the spectrum. Open his book and the root centre is a fiery orange-red, the heart a glowing gold, the throat a silvery gleam, the brow a mixture of rose and purplish-blue. The one place a spectrum appears at all is inside the six subdivisions of a single centre at the spleen, which he puts where svadhisthana should be. Nothing in him runs red-orange-yellow-green-blue-indigo-violet, clean and complete, up the spine. That final, seductive hardening came later still, and from a different world.

The historian Kurt Leland, who traced this whole development in his 2016 book Rainbow Body, puts the decisive move a generation earlier, in the colour-healing movement of the 1930s. Writers such as Ivah Bergh Whitten and S. G. J. Ouseley were already handing one band of the spectrum to each centre, in order, as a therapy. What happened in 1977 was the marriage. Ken Dychtwald brought the colour healers’ spectrum together with the human-potential movement’s list of psychological qualities, the grounding and the sexuality and the power and the compassion, and the chart we know was finished. It is elegant, it is memorable, it connects the inner centres to the physics of light, and in its finished form it is younger than the personal computer. Leland’s broader argument is that the modern chakra system was an unintentional collaboration, assembled over decades out of Theosophy, Indology, Jungian psychology, the human-potential movement at places like Esalen, and the energy-healing traditions that followed, until it hardened into something that now gets sold as ancient.

Set the dates side by side and the shape of the thing is undeniable. The tantric six-chakra systems: roughly a thousand years old. Purnananda’s text: the sixteenth century. Woodroffe’s translation: 1919. Leadbeater’s colours and glands: 1927. The spectrum ladder: the 1930s. Its marriage to the psychology: 1977. The chart that most people believe is a relic of immemorial antiquity received its final, familiar form within the lifetime of people still living.

Why the texts could not have a rainbow

There is a deeper reason the classical texts do not give the chakras the spectrum, and it is not merely that they predate the chart. They were never working with the logic of light at all. The colours in the Sat-chakra-nirupana, as this treatise has shown at every gate, follow the logic of the five elements. The earth-square is yellow. The water-crescent is white. The fire-triangle is red. The petals take their own hues, crimson, vermilion, storm-grey, bandhuka-red, smoky-purple, white. These colours are doing symbolic and elemental work. They could not line up as a spectrum, because they were never meant to be a spectrum. The root is not “red because it is at the bottom of the rainbow.” The root has crimson petals and a yellow square because earth is yellow and the lotus is crimson. A different system entirely.

The same is true of the count. The texts do not agree that there are seven chakras. Four in the Buddhist Hevajra Tantra. Six in Purnananda, with the crown set above them as the goal. Seven in the Shiva Samhita. Eleven in some Kaula sources. The clean seven of the poster is one tradition’s number, smoothed into a universal law it never was.

The cleanest proof

There is a simple way to see that the rainbow is foreign, and it does not require trusting any Western scholar, this treatise included. Look at the great Indian teachers who carried the living tradition into the twentieth century. Read how Swami Sivananda or Swami Satyananda of the Bihar School describe the centres. They describe the petals and the letters, the elements and the seed-sounds, the deities and the lingas, drawn from the texts. Where they use the rainbow colours at all, they are visibly importing a convention from elsewhere, recently, the same convention Leadbeater and the colour healers built. The tradition can describe its own chakras without the spectrum, because the spectrum was never its own. That a tradition can speak fully without a thing is the surest sign the thing was added from outside.

What this leaves us with

None of this is meant to sneer at the rainbow. The systems built on it, the colour meditations, the energy-healing modalities, the psychological readings of the seven centres, have helped many people, and they are entitled to exist on their own terms. The error is only one of attribution: presenting a twentieth-century synthesis, much of it Western, as the ancient wisdom of the seers. Call the overlay what it is, and it is harmless. Call it ancient, and it quietly buries the older, stranger, more demanding thing underneath.

And the older thing is the more remarkable. A map of an interior country, drawn by people reporting from inside a discipline. A serpent of lightning asleep at the base of the spine. Six gates of element and sound and deity, climbing from earth to mind. A central channel, normally shut, that the disciplined breath can open. A union at the crown that heals the split at the root of existence. And a return, a coming back down, into a body that still has to live. The tradition does not need the rainbow. It managed for centuries without it, and it is the larger thing.

This treatise has tried to walk back to the source, through the subtle body the texts actually drew, and report what is there. That it has drawn a map does not mean the country needs the map.

The country was always there.

The serpent does not require our colours.