What is Tantra?

[Guest guest]

"Tantras are the ancient scriptures, which were meant to spread the

light of knowledge of our True Self and bring the humanity out of

ignorance. They are also known as Agamas - revelations."

Dr. C.S. Shah

January 18, 2001

[Guest guest]

Hi Jose:

 

Dr. Shah's definition of TANTRA is quite nice, but I think rather

too general. You see, Tantra is an extremely complex and nuanced

concept, and it just cannot be defined that easily. In fact, I'd

argue that it cannot be defined at all -- but only pointed toward.

So please allow me to share a few additional "signposts" that

members might (or might not) find useful. I hope other members will

add to (or correct) my observations as necessary:

 

TANTRA is a Sanskrit word with multiple layers of meaning. One very

important meaning is "loom," with the implication of the countless

interconnected threads that make up a single piece of woven fabric.

The completed piece of fabric is a unified whole; but upon closer

examination, it is made of countless threads. The threads in turn

are inextricably interconnected -- in a fine fabric, none can be

pulled or damaged without affecting the integrity of the whole on at

least some level.

 

Another pivotal meaning of TANTRA is "methodology" -- with the same

implication of many actions and techniques working in unison within

a single entity or toward a single goal. Again we have the idea of a

multitude within that which is seemingly one; and an interconnected

oneness encompasisng that which is seemingly a multitude. I know

that it drives some people nuts when I speak of Shakta teachings

as "tools" and "instruction books" and so on -- but that's exactly

what is denoted by the word Tantra at this level.

 

Regarding Dr. Shah's phrase, "Tantras ... are also known as Agamas,"

it is technically correct, but might require some clarification.

 

You see, at the most general level, TANTRA is simply a synonym for

SHASTRA -- which does in fact mean "scripture." On a slightly more

precise level, TANTRA is also a synonym for the Agamic texts,

especially those of the Shakta faith. (The Agamas are a class of

scriptures providing detailed instruction in all aspects of

religion, mystical knowledge and science.) The Tantras, in this

sense, are also associated with the Saiva tradition and -- to a

lesser degree -- with other schools of Hinduism.

 

In closing, a final meaning of TANTRA should be noted, because a

lack of understanding in this area can complicate discussions and

generate many wrong impressions. The thing is, in addition to

indicating the scriptures themselves, the word TANTRA also denotes

the techniques described within those scriptures -- i.e., various

specific methods and practices within the Shakta (or Saiva)

traditions. As a simple example, "pranayama" (yogic breath control)

is a Tantra.

 

Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami, a great Saiva renunciate who died

in 2001, was nonetheless deeply knowledgeable about Tantric

pratices, and although he rather strictly steered his devotees away

from Tantric practices, it is said that he was himself accomplished

in the techniques, albeit purely on the Samayachara approach.

 

In an extremely cautious discussion of the field, Subramuniyaswami

wrote, "Tantra generally involves a reversal of the normal flow of

energies." (You see? This is precisely what we've been talking about

in the thread entitled, "Sadhana: Merging Upward Into Devi" --

message 10847 and onward):

 

/message/10847

 

Subramuniyaswami continued, "Tantra refers to traditions, mainly

within Saivism and Shaktism, that focus on the arousal of the

kundalini force, and which view the human body as the vehicle of the

Divine and an instrument for liberation. Tantra's ultimate aim is a

channeling of the kundalini life force through the sushumna channel

upwards into the sahasrara chakra and beyond into Parasiva. Shakta

Tantra places a strong emphasis on the worship of the feminine force

[shakti]. Depending upon the school, this may be symbolic, or

literal in rites involving sexual intercourse, etc. Tantra's main

principle is the use of the material to gain the spiritual. In the

hands of the unscrupulous, tantra techniques become black magic

(abhichara)."

 

Aum Maatangyai Namahe

 

 

 

, "Jose Enrique Rosa"

<master4114> wrote:

> "Tantras are the ancient scriptures, which were meant to spread

the

> light of knowledge of our True Self and bring the humanity out of

> ignorance. They are also known as Agamas - revelations."

> Dr. C.S. Shah

> January 18, 2001

[Guest guest]

Dear Devi Bhakta:

 

Awesome response!

 

If I can add one point: Due to the complexity of Tantra if a sadhaka

is not correctly guided, he can go astray. Easily astrayed!

 

 

 

, "Devi Bhakta"

<devi_bhakta> wrote:

> Hi Jose:

>

> Dr. Shah's definition of TANTRA is quite nice, but I think rather

> too general. You see, Tantra is an extremely complex and nuanced

> concept, and it just cannot be defined that easily. In fact, I'd

> argue that it cannot be defined at all -- but only pointed toward.

> So please allow me to share a few additional "signposts" that

> members might (or might not) find useful. I hope other members will

> add to (or correct) my observations as necessary:

>

> TANTRA is a Sanskrit word with multiple layers of meaning. One very

> important meaning is "loom," with the implication of the countless

> interconnected threads that make up a single piece of woven fabric.

> The completed piece of fabric is a unified whole; but upon closer

> examination, it is made of countless threads. The threads in turn

> are inextricably interconnected -- in a fine fabric, none can be

> pulled or damaged without affecting the integrity of the whole on at

> least some level.

>

> Another pivotal meaning of TANTRA is "methodology" -- with the same

> implication of many actions and techniques working in unison within

> a single entity or toward a single goal. Again we have the idea of a

> multitude within that which is seemingly one; and an interconnected

> oneness encompasisng that which is seemingly a multitude. I know

> that it drives some people nuts when I speak of Shakta teachings

> as "tools" and "instruction books" and so on -- but that's exactly

> what is denoted by the word Tantra at this level.

>

> Regarding Dr. Shah's phrase, "Tantras ... are also known as Agamas,"

> it is technically correct, but might require some clarification.

>

> You see, at the most general level, TANTRA is simply a synonym for

> SHASTRA -- which does in fact mean "scripture." On a slightly more

> precise level, TANTRA is also a synonym for the Agamic texts,

> especially those of the Shakta faith. (The Agamas are a class of

> scriptures providing detailed instruction in all aspects of

> religion, mystical knowledge and science.) The Tantras, in this

> sense, are also associated with the Saiva tradition and -- to a

> lesser degree -- with other schools of Hinduism.

>

> In closing, a final meaning of TANTRA should be noted, because a

> lack of understanding in this area can complicate discussions and

> generate many wrong impressions. The thing is, in addition to

> indicating the scriptures themselves, the word TANTRA also denotes

> the techniques described within those scriptures -- i.e., various

> specific methods and practices within the Shakta (or Saiva)

> traditions. As a simple example, "pranayama" (yogic breath control)

> is a Tantra.

>

> Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami, a great Saiva renunciate who died

> in 2001, was nonetheless deeply knowledgeable about Tantric

> pratices, and although he rather strictly steered his devotees away

> from Tantric practices, it is said that he was himself accomplished

> in the techniques, albeit purely on the Samayachara approach.

>

> In an extremely cautious discussion of the field, Subramuniyaswami

> wrote, "Tantra generally involves a reversal of the normal flow of

> energies." (You see? This is precisely what we've been talking about

> in the thread entitled, "Sadhana: Merging Upward Into Devi" --

> message 10847 and onward):

>

> /message/10847

>

> Subramuniyaswami continued, "Tantra refers to traditions, mainly

> within Saivism and Shaktism, that focus on the arousal of the

> kundalini force, and which view the human body as the vehicle of the

> Divine and an instrument for liberation. Tantra's ultimate aim is a

> channeling of the kundalini life force through the sushumna channel

> upwards into the sahasrara chakra and beyond into Parasiva. Shakta

> Tantra places a strong emphasis on the worship of the feminine force

> [shakti]. Depending upon the school, this may be symbolic, or

> literal in rites involving sexual intercourse, etc. Tantra's main

> principle is the use of the material to gain the spiritual. In the

> hands of the unscrupulous, tantra techniques become black magic

> (abhichara)."

>

> Aum Maatangyai Namahe

>

>

>

> , "Jose Enrique Rosa"

> <master4114> wrote:

> > "Tantras are the ancient scriptures, which were meant to spread

> the

> > light of knowledge of our True Self and bring the humanity out of

> > ignorance. They are also known as Agamas - revelations."

> > Dr. C.S. Shah

> > January 18, 2001

[Guest guest]

Thank you, Jose ...

 

Glad you liked my post. As regards yoru additional point, we are in

complete agreement. ;-)

 

DB

 

, "Jose Enrique Rosa"

<master4114> wrote:

> Dear Devi Bhakta:

>

> Awesome response!

>

> If I can add one point: Due to the complexity of Tantra if a

sadhaka

> is not correctly guided, he can go astray. Easily astrayed!

[Guest guest]

Tantra is also referred to as Mantra Shastra.

 

When people say Mantra shastra, they usually mean Tantra/Agama.

 

The reason being, the subject of most Tantras is Mantra.

 

Tantra revolves around or is centered on the concept of Guru and

Mantra.

 

Mantras are those that are revealed from the five/six faces of Shiva.

 

Tantra in a broader sense is technique. Hence we have Shalya Tantra

(surgery), Prasna Tantra(astrology I think), Pancha Tantra(moral

stories).

 

When it comes to spirituality it means that which is revealed by

Shiva heard by Devi and approved by Narayana/MahaVishnu.

 

 

, "Devi Bhakta"

<devi_bhakta> wrote:

> Hi Jose:

>

> Dr. Shah's definition of TANTRA is quite nice, but I think rather

> too general. You see, Tantra is an extremely complex and nuanced

> concept, and it just cannot be defined that easily. In fact, I'd

> argue that it cannot be defined at all -- but only pointed toward.

> So please allow me to share a few additional "signposts" that

> members might (or might not) find useful. I hope other members

will

> add to (or correct) my observations as necessary:

>

> TANTRA is a Sanskrit word with multiple layers of meaning. One

very

> important meaning is "loom," with the implication of the countless

> interconnected threads that make up a single piece of woven

fabric.

> The completed piece of fabric is a unified whole; but upon closer

> examination, it is made of countless threads. The threads in turn

> are inextricably interconnected -- in a fine fabric, none can be

> pulled or damaged without affecting the integrity of the whole on

at

> least some level.

>

> Another pivotal meaning of TANTRA is "methodology" -- with the

same

> implication of many actions and techniques working in unison

within

> a single entity or toward a single goal. Again we have the idea of

a

> multitude within that which is seemingly one; and an

interconnected

> oneness encompasisng that which is seemingly a multitude. I know

> that it drives some people nuts when I speak of Shakta teachings

> as "tools" and "instruction books" and so on -- but that's exactly

> what is denoted by the word Tantra at this level.

>

> Regarding Dr. Shah's phrase, "Tantras ... are also known as

Agamas,"

> it is technically correct, but might require some clarification.

>

> You see, at the most general level, TANTRA is simply a synonym for

> SHASTRA -- which does in fact mean "scripture." On a slightly

more

> precise level, TANTRA is also a synonym for the Agamic texts,

> especially those of the Shakta faith. (The Agamas are a class of

> scriptures providing detailed instruction in all aspects of

> religion, mystical knowledge and science.) The Tantras, in this

> sense, are also associated with the Saiva tradition and -- to a

> lesser degree -- with other schools of Hinduism.

>

> In closing, a final meaning of TANTRA should be noted, because a

> lack of understanding in this area can complicate discussions and

> generate many wrong impressions. The thing is, in addition to

> indicating the scriptures themselves, the word TANTRA also denotes

> the techniques described within those scriptures -- i.e., various

> specific methods and practices within the Shakta (or Saiva)

> traditions. As a simple example, "pranayama" (yogic breath

control)

> is a Tantra.

>

> Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami, a great Saiva renunciate who died

> in 2001, was nonetheless deeply knowledgeable about Tantric

> pratices, and although he rather strictly steered his devotees

away

> from Tantric practices, it is said that he was himself

accomplished

> in the techniques, albeit purely on the Samayachara approach.

>

> In an extremely cautious discussion of the field, Subramuniyaswami

> wrote, "Tantra generally involves a reversal of the normal flow of

> energies." (You see? This is precisely what we've been talking

about

> in the thread entitled, "Sadhana: Merging Upward Into Devi" --

> message 10847 and onward):

>

> /message/10847

>

> Subramuniyaswami continued, "Tantra refers to traditions, mainly

> within Saivism and Shaktism, that focus on the arousal of the

> kundalini force, and which view the human body as the vehicle of

the

> Divine and an instrument for liberation. Tantra's ultimate aim is

a

> channeling of the kundalini life force through the sushumna

channel

> upwards into the sahasrara chakra and beyond into Parasiva. Shakta

> Tantra places a strong emphasis on the worship of the feminine

force

> [shakti]. Depending upon the school, this may be symbolic, or

> literal in rites involving sexual intercourse, etc. Tantra's main

> principle is the use of the material to gain the spiritual. In the

> hands of the unscrupulous, tantra techniques become black magic

> (abhichara)."

>

> Aum Maatangyai Namahe

>

>

>

> , "Jose Enrique Rosa"

> <master4114> wrote:

> > "Tantras are the ancient scriptures, which were meant to spread

> the

> > light of knowledge of our True Self and bring the humanity out

of

> > ignorance. They are also known as Agamas - revelations."

> > Dr. C.S. Shah

> > January 18, 2001

[Guest guest]

Thank you. As I had mentioned in my mail I'm new to this and would appreciate inputs from learned sources. Which work of Avalon would you reccomend, since you have mentioned "some of his work on sacred texts".

 

kartik gaurav <omkaaraya .au> wrote: I think the article you've cited has a lot of [and I mean a lot of] bias. Avalon has done the best work in presenting a synopsis of Tantra in english. My aim is not to give a cheaper watered down version of what I feel is the magnum opus of tantric literature [in english]. You might some of his work on sacred texts.

[Guest guest]

Serpent Power, Shiva Shakti, his translation of Prapanchasara Tantra and Introduction to Tantra Shastra as well as a variety of other stuff.

 

Good source of info:

 

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/index.htm

 

 

 

Devi <tclived > wrote: Thank you. As I had mentioned in my mail I'm new to this and would appreciate inputs from learned sources. Which work of Avalon would you reccomend, since you have mentioned "some of his work on sacred texts".

 

kartik gaurav <omkaaraya .au> wrote: I think the article you've cited has a lot of [and I mean a lot of] bias. Avalon has done the best work in presenting a synopsis of Tantra in english. My aim is not to give a cheaper watered down version of what I feel is the magnum opus of tantric literature [in english]. You might some of his work on sacred texts.

 

 

Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.

[Guest guest]

Thanks for the reccomendations.

 

I would also like to mention here that though my translation may not be up to the mark I would not like it to reflect on the original author or describe his work as "cheap and watered down". He comes from a well known lineage of Tantris and scholars. The book Tantra Sara Samgraham [ Tantra Samuchayam A.D. 15th cent.] a renowned book on Vastu in temple construction was written by Chenas Narayanan Namboothiripad, one of his fore-fathers. The article in discussion was written for the layman.

 

In case you are interested you could go to this link to view pictures of the Somayagam which was conducted at Thrissur and where Shri Dineshan Namboothiripad is conducting the Bhoomi Puja.

 

http://www.namboothiri.com/somayaagam/

[Guest guest]

This article hints at some mysteries it took my whole life and a

tremendous effort to get a glimpse off. I wasn´t even sure that there

are people living that are aware of it.

Thanks to Kartikji i know now that what i consider highest

knowledge is cheap and watered down.

 

 

, Devi <tclived wrote:

>

> Thanks for the reccomendations.

>

> I would also like to mention here that though my translation may

not be up to the mark I would not like it to reflect on the

original author or describe his work as "cheap and watered down". He

comes from a well known lineage of Tantris and scholars. The book

Tantra Sara Samgraham [ Tantra Samuchayam A.D. 15th cent.] a renowned

book on Vastu in temple construction was written by Chenas Narayanan

Namboothiripad, one of his fore-fathers. The article in discussion

was written for the layman.

>

> In case you are interested you could go to this link to view

pictures of the Somayagam which was conducted at Thrissur and where

Shri Dineshan Namboothiripad is conducting the Bhoomi Puja.

>

> http://www.namboothiri.com/somayaagam/

>

[Guest guest]

namaste

 

I think you misunderstood me. I just said the author [Person you mentioned] has a significant amount of bias in his article. I was just saying that I dont want to paraphrase or summarize the works or ideas as presented by Arthur Avalon, as it would be watered down and cheap.

 

Jaya Jaya Shri Tripura!

 

Devi <tclived > wrote: Thanks for the reccomendations.

 

I would also like to mention here that though my translation may not be up to the mark I would not like it to reflect on the original author or describe his work as "cheap and watered down". He comes from a well known lineage of Tantris and scholars. The book Tantra Sara Samgraham [ Tantra Samuchayam A.D. 15th cent.] a renowned book on Vastu in temple construction was written by Chenas Narayanan Namboothiripad, one of his fore-fathers. The article in discussion was written for the layman.

 

In case you are interested you could go to this link to view pictures of the Somayagam which was conducted at Thrissur and where Shri Dineshan Namboothiripad is conducting the Bhoomi Puja.

 

http://www.namboothiri.com/somayaagam/

 

 

 

Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.

[Guest guest]

Many thanks Mahahrada for contributing to the misunderstanding.

 

mahahradanatha <mahahradanatha > wrote: This article hints at some mysteries it took my whole life and a

tremendous effort to get a glimpse off. I wasn´t even sure that there

are people living that are aware of it.

Thanks to Kartikji i know now that what i consider highest

knowledge is cheap and watered down.

[Guest guest]

What a relief... i was concerned for one moment.

 

, kartik gaurav <omkaaraya

wrote:

>

> namaste

>

> I think you misunderstood me. I just said the author [Person you

mentioned] has a significant amount of bias in his article. I was

just saying that I dont want to paraphrase or summarize the works or

ideas as presented by Arthur Avalon, as it would be watered down and

cheap.

>

> Jaya Jaya Shri Tripura!

>

> Devi <tclived wrote: Thanks

for the reccomendations.

>

> I would also like to mention here that though my translation may

not be up to the mark I would not like it to reflect on the

original author or describe his work as "cheap and watered down". He

comes from a well known lineage of Tantris and scholars. The book

Tantra Sara Samgraham [ Tantra Samuchayam A.D. 15th cent.] a renowned

book on Vastu in temple construction was written by Chenas Narayanan

Namboothiripad, one of his fore-fathers. The article in discussion

was written for the layman.

>

> In case you are interested you could go to this link to view

pictures of the Somayagam which was conducted at Thrissur and where

Shri Dineshan Namboothiripad is conducting the Bhoomi Puja.

>

> http://www.namboothiri.com/somayaagam/

>

>

>

>

>

> Send instant messages to your online friends

http://au.messenger.

>

>

[Guest guest]

hehe:) request to the mods : maybe we can install the software "Happy

Shakta 3.0" that filters all newage and nathpanth messages before they

appear in the list?

 

But i have an excuse:

Reading the original message "what is tantra" and the second message of

the same title, that started the thread, caused me to loose all

control over my mind , deranged by smoking too much pot with my homo

friends, then it happened that i lost control over my breakfast and

both went the vama way so to say and I spilled brains all over the

monitor and keyboard.

Resulting in the sad fact that contributed to the terrible situation,

by adding some random keystrokes that where the results of wiping the

keyboard clean

 

>bowing and pacifying mode on>

 

I herewith humbly apologise

 

>bowing and pacifying mode off>

 

 

, kartik gaurav <omkaaraya

wrote:

>

> Many thanks Mahahrada for contributing to the misunderstanding.

>

> mahahradanatha <mahahradanatha

wrote: This article hints at some

mysteries it took my whole life and a

> tremendous effort to get a glimpse off. I wasn´t even sure that there

> are people living that are aware of it.

> Thanks to Kartikji i know now that what i consider highest

> knowledge is cheap and watered down.

>

[Guest guest]

I think Avalon has only published Prapanchasara Tantra and not translated it, though he has given an elaborate introduction. To understand Prapanchasara tantra, mere knowledge of Sanskrit is not enough as the work is in coded form.

 

Shakti and Shaakta is also a good work of his. Plus Garland of Letters.

 

JR

 

kartik gaurav <omkaaraya .au> wrote:

 

Serpent Power, Shiva Shakti, his translation of Prapanchasara Tantra and Introduction to Tantra Shastra as well as a variety of other stuff.

 

Good source of info:

 

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/index.htm

 

Devi <tclived > wrote: Thank you. As I had mentioned in my mail I'm new to this and would appreciate inputs from learned sources. Which work of Avalon would you reccomend, since you have mentioned "some of his work on sacred texts".

kartik gaurav <omkaaraya .au> wrote: I think the article you've cited has a lot of [and I mean a lot of] bias. Avalon has done the best work in presenting a synopsis of Tantra in english. My aim is not to give a cheaper watered down version of what I feel is the magnum opus of tantric literature [in english]. You might some of his work on sacred texts.

 

Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.

[Guest guest]

There is much more he published some he translated like the

kamakalavilasa this jewel from the hallowed hadimata, which i bought

when i was 14 years, and i will never give up, it was my first book

on indian philosophy, i wanted a yoga book, and ended up clutching

the Kamakalavilasa to my breast, i knew i had to buy this and refused

to give it up, i had to force the bookseller to sell it to me- he

insisted that i was to young, but i insisted that this is not his

problem , and his only job is to take the money, so after some

fighting, i took the treasure home I am 50 now and have not yet

understood it, maybe i am still too young

Avalon edited the Tantrarajatantra, then Sri Chakrasamawaratantra ,

Mahanirvana Tantra and i think one or two more i cannot remember

right now.

 

, Radhakrishnan J

<jayaarshree wrote:

>

> I think Avalon has only published Prapanchasara Tantra and not

translated it, though he has given an elaborate introduction. To

understand Prapanchasara tantra, mere knowledge of Sanskrit is not

enough as the work is in coded form.

>

> Shakti and Shaakta is also a good work of his. Plus Garland of

Letters.

>

> JR

>

> kartik gaurav <omkaaraya

wrote:

>

> Serpent Power, Shiva Shakti, his translation of Prapanchasara

Tantra and Introduction to Tantra Shastra as well as a variety of

other stuff.

>

> Good source of info:

>

> http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/index.htm

>

> Devi <tclived wrote: Thank

you. As I had mentioned in my mail I'm new to this and would

appreciate inputs from learned sources. Which work of Avalon would

you reccomend, since you have mentioned "some of his work on sacred

texts".

>

> kartik gaurav <omkaaraya

wrote: I think the article you've

cited has a lot of [and I mean a lot of] bias. Avalon has done the

best work in presenting a synopsis of Tantra in english. My aim is

not to give a cheaper watered down version of what I feel is the

magnum opus of tantric literature [in english]. You might some of his

work on sacred texts.

>

>

>

>

>

>

> Send instant messages to your online friends

http://au.messenger.

>

>

[Guest guest]

I too (mis)understood your post in much the same manner as mahahrada; only I chose not to react.

JR

 

kartik gaurav <omkaaraya .au> wrote: Many thanks Mahahrada for contributing to the misunderstanding.

 

mahahradanatha <mahahradanatha > wrote: This article hints at some mysteries it took my whole life and a

tremendous effort to get a glimpse off. I wasn´t even sure that there

are people living that are aware of it.

Thanks to Kartikji i know now that what i consider highest

knowledge is cheap and watered down.

 

 

 

 

Finding fabulous fares is fun.

Let FareChase search your favorite travel sites to find flight and hotel bargains.

[Guest guest]

Not meaning to cause offense, I think I should explain myself:

 

 

Ok I will elaborate on what is seemingly now my aphorisms [one is allowed a bit of self laudation lol]. I mentioned bias in the article as the author attributes the origin of Tantra to certain era and to a certain being. Of course if you go into Shakta tantras then that particular origin theory becomes obsolete, as it would in the Shaiva context. So in that respect there is bias. I didnt go further than commenting on that one particular aspect.

 

Tantra means a lot of things to a lot of people. It is a word which has been endeared my many paramparas over a vast period of time. So obviously there will be significant differences in how one percieves what it is and most importantly what it includes. As far as Yantras are concerned, there are both bahya and antaraH theories to their relevance in one's practice. Once again same issue with mantras. Different paramparas have differences in what is their mode and mechanism of action.

I do not think negatively of the article as any discussion on this topic would result in a volumous work [such as the tantraloka, which it self excludes a whole heap of different siddhantas and paddhatis]. So of course they'd be omissions made in a smaller document. I didnt think people would make that much of a big deal out of what little old me said.

 

"I think the article you've cited has a lot of [and I mean a lot of] bias. Avalon

has done the best work in presenting a synopsis of Tantra in english. My aim is

not to give a cheaper watered down version of what I feel is the magnum opus of

tantric literature [in english]. You might some of his work on sacred texts."

 

In that aforementioned statement, I am talking about Avalon. I made no further reference to that article after the first sentence. Third sentence onwards is just me rambling on why I dont want to talk about Avalon's work. Surely anyone can see that, no???

 

I believed that most tantras came from either Shiva or was inspired into Shiva via Shakti. As also mentioned in Niruttara....

 

I was always taught that in a discussion all criticism should be thoroughly accounted for, so that people do not feel insulted for no good reason. If you do still feel insulted then Shiva help you. Because I certainly cant!

 

 

 

 

 

Radhakrishnan J <jayaarshree > wrote: I too (mis)understood your post in much the same manner as mahahrada; only I chose not to react.

JR

 

kartik gaurav <omkaaraya .au> wrote: Many thanks Mahahrada for contributing to the misunderstanding.

mahahradanatha <mahahradanatha > wrote: This article hints at some mysteries it took my whole life and a

tremendous effort to get a glimpse off. I wasn´t even sure that there

are people living that are aware of it.

Thanks to Kartikji i know now that what i consider highest

knowledge is cheap and watered down.

[Guest guest]

You're apologizing without even having said much this time, usually you

never apologize after having written a treatise, having a good day

 

 

 

 

[]

On Behalf Of mahahradanatha

Saturday, February 10, 2007 8:39 AM

 

Re: What is Tantra?

 

hehe:) request to the mods : maybe we can install the software "Happy

Shakta 3.0" that filters all newage and nathpanth messages before they

appear in the list?

[Guest guest]

Tantra is continued recognition of ones innate divinity. Specifics are not

always the same but actually always different as tantra is passed down

through the current not of fact or technique but through the current of

living wisdom which tailors inteself to the time. Because of the fact that

ones own nature is that of Guru Parampara Whomever, and not Guru Mr. So and

So. Thus out of the blue Mahakali may easily be cranking one from the

inside, and one can mix the three into with that and make one. Effortlessly.

And then all this could be Mahakali in one single moment, and life the

expression of Her Exuberance. If one could simply make the connect. I

doubt Mahakali is so interested which exact lineage any of Her creatures

follow. Though of course we all take great pride in our traditions and

that's certainly a good thing. It would be very interesting to find a

lineage without pride.

[Guest guest]

Namaskaar

 

I wish to share some comments on this discussion, aside from the academic posturing of what tantra is, there are many facets to it, that remain unexplored.

Of what I have seen of the Shaiva and Shakta tantras ( not having read all, the opinions I express , will hopefully convey my level of understanding), there seems to a pattern in the varying streams. Its applications are varied Yantra, Mantra, Yoga, medicine, Alchemy are some of the most outstanding facets that come to mind..

 

Shakta tantras seem to follow a path of purification with the end of developing power that can be utilized and expressed in any number of applications..

The form of Yoga practised by Shaktas is called Laya Yoga- dissolution of one's personal consciousness

 

On the other hand Shaiva tantras seem to point toward removing bindings within the mind to allow one immersion in the consciousness of God with the intent of becoming one/established in the consciousness of God.

The form of Yoga practised by Shaivas is called Trika Yoga- Stillness of mind.

 

Something that has become somewhat apparent to me, is that there is need for both. The extreme purification of Mahakali is required for one to be able to withstand higher grades of energy and new levels of power. The purification of the mind and senses are also required to be able to handle this enhanced level of power

 

By following a rigid set of rules as per the individual sect ( it is not clear whether

the teaching is applicable to all universally or were meant for particular Sadhakas) one is somewhat constrained as there are different aspects of ones being, to be worked one to cause evolution/progress in ones Sadhana.

 

Therefore I am unclear as to whether a strict definition of what tantra is, can be attempted. One may give individual opinions as per the teachings give by a particular parampara, but to equate that with a universal definition of what tantra is in its totality, I think may be either elusive or at best ambitious.

 

Best Regards

Devindra Maharaj

 

kartik gaurav <omkaaraya .au> wrote: Not meaning to cause offense, I think I should explain myself:

 

Ok I will elaborate on what is seemingly now my aphorisms [one is allowed a bit of self laudation lol]. I mentioned bias in the article as the author attributes the origin of Tantra to certain era and to a certain being. Of course if you go into Shakta tantras then that particular origin theory becomes obsolete, as it would in the Shaiva context. So in that respect there is bias. I didnt go further than commenting on that one particular aspect.

 

Tantra means a lot of things to a lot of people. It is a word which has been endeared my many paramparas over a vast period of time. So obviously there will be significant differences in how one percieves what it is and most importantly what it includes. As far as Yantras are concerned, there are both bahya and antaraH theories to their relevance in one's practice. Once again same issue with mantras. Different paramparas have differences in what is their mode and mechanism of action.

I do not think negatively of the article as any discussion on this topic would result in a volumous work [such as the tantraloka, which it self excludes a whole heap of different siddhantas and paddhatis]. So of course they'd be omissions made in a smaller document. I didnt think people would make that much of a big deal out of what little old me said.

 

"I think the article you've cited has a lot of [and I mean a lot of] bias. Avalon

has done the best work in presenting a synopsis of Tantra in english. My aim is

not to give a cheaper watered down version of what I feel is the magnum opus of

tantric literature [in english]. You might some of his work on sacred texts."

 

In that aforementioned statement, I am talking about Avalon. I made no further reference to that article after the first sentence. Third sentence onwards is just me rambling on why I dont want to talk about Avalon's work. Surely anyone can see that, no???

I believed that most tantras came from either Shiva or was inspired into Shiva via Shakti. As also mentioned in Niruttara....

 

I was always taught that in a discussion all criticism should be thoroughly accounted for, so that people do not feel insulted for no good reason. If you do still feel insulted then Shiva help you. Because I certainly cant!

 

Radhakrishnan J <jayaarshree > wrote: I too (mis)understood your post in much the same manner as mahahrada; only I chose not to react.

JR

kartik gaurav <omkaaraya .au> wrote: Many thanks Mahahrada for contributing to the misunderstanding.

mahahradanatha <mahahradanatha > wrote: This article hints at some mysteries it took my whole life and a

tremendous effort to get a glimpse off. I wasn´t even sure that there

are people living that are aware of it.

Thanks to Kartikji i know now that what i consider highest

knowledge is cheap and watered down.

 

 

 

 

8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time

with the Search movie showtime shortcut.

[Guest guest]

Thank you, Kartik'ji for the explanation.

 

I would like to add that I'm not feeling the least bit insulted. How can I when I have no illusions of being a scholar or an intellectual but am just a simple sadhaka fumbling her way through this amazing maze. I don't take it personally and am glad that it's been able to generate some constructive dialogues. But I did not want it to reflect on the author.

 

I think the author here has mainly dealt with one aspect of Tantra and more specifically in relation to temples, because in conclusion he talks of temple culture and how the construction as well as the rituals are based on tantric principles. This could again be a debatable point because while it certainly applies to temples in Kerala I'm not sure if it's the same elsewhere.

[Guest guest]

No offence meant to anybody, just to lighten the atmosphere a bit. Sharing an all time favourite poem of mine.

John Godfrey Saxe's ( 1816-1887) version of the famous Indian legend,

It was six men of Indostan,

To learning much inclined,

Who went to see the Elephant

(Though all of them were blind),

That each by observation

Might satisfy his mind.

 

The First approach'd the Elephant,

And happening to fall

Against his broad and sturdy side,

At once began to bawl:

"God bless me! but the Elephant

Is very like a wall!"

 

The Second, feeling of the tusk,

Cried, -"Ho! what have we here

So very round and smooth and sharp?

To me 'tis mighty clear,

This wonder of an Elephant

Is very like a spear!"

 

The Third approach'd the animal,

And happening to take

The squirming trunk within his hands,

Thus boldly up and spake:

"I see," -quoth he- "the Elephant

Is very like a snake!"

 

The Fourth reached out an eager hand,

And felt about the knee:

"What most this wondrous beast is like

Is mighty plain," -quoth he,-

"'Tis clear enough the Elephant

Is very like a tree!"

 

The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,

Said- "E'en the blindest man

Can tell what this resembles most;

Deny the fact who can,

This marvel of an Elephant

Is very like a fan!"

 

The Sixth no sooner had begun

About the beast to grope,

Then, seizing on the swinging tail

That fell within his scope,

"I see," -quoth he,- "the Elephant

Is very like a rope!"

 

And so these men of Indostan

Disputed loud and long,

Each in his own opinion

Exceeding stiff and strong,

Though each was partly in the right,

And all were in the wrong!

 

MORAL,

So, oft in theologic wars

The disputants, I ween,

Rail on in utter ignorance

Of what each other mean;

And prate about an Elephant

Not one of them has seen!

[Guest guest]

, "llundrub" <llundrub

wrote:

>

> You're apologizing without even having said much this time, usually

you

> never apologize after having written a treatise, having a good

day

 

I was shocked to find out that i lost my ability to read and

understand english, i always knew that i couldn´t speak and write

nice and correct

 

but there is more to it, you are right, i am a litttle schizo at the

moment, past identity has taken over.

>

>

>

[]

> On Behalf Of mahahradanatha

> Saturday, February 10, 2007 8:39 AM

>

> Re: What is Tantra?

>

> hehe:) request to the mods : maybe we can install the

software "Happy

> Shakta 3.0" that filters all newage and nathpanth messages before

they

> appear in the list?

>

[Guest guest]

, "mahahradanatha"

<mahahradanatha wrote:

>

> , "llundrub" <llundrub@>

> wrote:

> >

> > You're apologizing without even having said much this time,

usually

> you

> > never apologize after having written a treatise, having a good

> day

>

> I was shocked to find out that i lost my ability to read and

> understand english, i always knew that i couldn´t speak and write

> nice and correct

>

but there is more to it, you are right, i am a litttle schizo at the

moment, past identity has taken over.

 

 

 

You are not alone !!! But to admit it publicly is an honest

emotion. A man has broken well into the open when he say, "I am a

little schizo" without being afraid of what he has just said. To

realise that this is what you are or this is what you have become,

is the beginning of new wisdom.

 

For instance, it is not wrong to be puzzled about what you are today

, any more than it is wrong not to know what you want to be. It is

never wrong to continue the search for the true self. What is wrong

is for the self to accept the person you have become without

determining whether it is real or articifial.

 

My words of wisdom for today. * LOL *

[Guest guest]

Thanks for the quote and link.

 

 

[]

On Behalf Of mahahradanatha

Tuesday, February 13, 2007 8:01 AM

 

Re: What is Tantra? " I am a cockroach, I

understand my nature."

 

This is excerpt from the teaching of the very ancient Swastika

Dharma of the Kingdom of zhang zhung west of Kailash containend

in "the flowering light tantra"