Tantra: A Private Exchange (Part III)

[Guest guest]

FROM OMPREM TO DEVI BHAKTA

 

OM Devi Bhakta

 

You wrote: "I write what seems true to me, and wait for people to

either confirm or correct me. When I'm met with ominous silence, I

think "either I've hit the nail right on the head -- or ...".

 

It seems to me that one should write what seems true without

expectation - not expectation of confirmation, nor of correction, nor

of reputation. If you need an indicator, the best one is the number

of members (barring glitches) and secondarily, the message

traffic, although as we both know there are many who are content to

read without comment. Perhaps, not necessarily the volume of traffic

but the quality of the traffic, either pro or con.

 

You are an informed and articulate advocate. Your views and

explanations are appreciated by all.

 

I agree to some extent that motivations based on the dominant guna do

not define Tantra. Your example of tamasic motivation was a good

one. However, even in that case, the person could have exercised

those base goals in some other venue. There was still something

positive, something that appealled to his spiritual instincts

(however much blunted those instincts were) that led him to 'Tantric'

practices. Perhaps, we are confusing his spiritual motivation with

his baser motivations. Those spiritual motivations led him to

adopt certain practices. The spiritual resonance that those practices

had with him could be the type of motivation that I was interested

in, the motivations that lead, if not to a definition of Tantra, at

least lead to a list of salient characteristics of Tantric

practice.

 

If you want to repost these emails in your group, that is fine with

me. They may encourage others to join in and add illumination the

topic.

 

OM Namah Sivaya

 

Omprem

 

FROM DEVI_BHAKTA TO OMPREM

 

Namaskar OmPrem ji!

 

Thank you for the kind message. I think I will compile

our discussion to post.

 

*** It seems to me that one should write what seems true without

expectation - not expectation of confirmation, nor of correction, nor

of reputation.***

 

I really tend to agree with you. I am usually secure enough to post

my opinions. As I've said of our discussions, it is nice to get

confirmation when I'm on the right track or correction if I'm

straying off the path. I like to learn and improve, and the only

way to do that sometimes is to stick out one's neck and expose

oneself to "being wrong" in public. That's fine with me -- it's a

matter of substance over form. There is a certain mindset that says a

moderator must come across as an "authority" on the subject of

her/his Group -- but that is my philosophy. I see myself more as a

facilitator -- even a custodian: Keeping things neat and polished,

sweeping up with people leave a mess, tossing out the rowdies etc.

 

*** There was still something positive, something that appealled to

his spiritual instincts (however much blunted those instincts were)

that led him to 'Tantric' practices. Perhaps, we are confusing his

spiritual motivation with his baser motivations.***

 

Maybe. I think that's where we have to clarify our understanding.

Most Tantras claim to present a technique that will take you to a

certain goal if followed to the letter. There is always a warning

against misuse. Just as in meditation, one should not be distracted

by various interim images that may arise in the mind, but keep

forging forward, the Tantric is supposed to ignore the powers that

naturally accrue as one breaks down the mental barriers that

artificially separate him from the Divine. To fall in love with the

powers entails a backslide from the true goal of Tantra, which is

undoubtedly moksha.

 

But the reason I say it's a technique is that it adjusts itself to

whatever philosophy adopts it -- the obvious examples are various

forms of Tantric Hinduism versus Tantric Buddhism. Similar techniques

in the service of different spiritual perceptions. And it is

said that Gnosticism could be called "Tantric Christianity" and

Sufism "Tantric Islam." Likewise, to put these techniques into the

service of evil intent is Black Magic. In other words -- Tantra is

simply a technique for accruing and focusing Energy, like gathering

and concentrating light into a laser. How you channel that energy is

determined by your philosophy (call it religion, call it motivation) -

- Shaktism, Shavism, Buddhism, Black Magic, whatever! The laser can

be used for good (microsurgery, for example) or evil (as a deadly

weapon) -- but the technique for creating it remains the same. And so

it is with Tantra.

 

*** a list of salient characteristics of Tantric practice. ***

 

I agree that this would be a worthwhile endeavor. The book I

mentioned is an attempt toward that end, but certainly not the last

word. I tend to think the process of compiling such a list would be

more valuable than the compilation itself. ...

 

Anyway, sorry for my slow reply to your kind letter. I've been

offline most of the week, and rather than scribbling off a cursory

response, and decided to wait til I had time to write a more

substantial reply.

 

Aum Maatangyai Namahe

 

DB

[Guest guest]

My $0.02:

 

Many of the Western Tantra teachers ("California Tantra") are most

interested in the temporal aspects than the spiritual aspects!

 

Around 900 AD, Abhinavagupta has codified the Principles of Tantra in

his two monumental works: Tantraloka and Tantrasara. To my knowledge

these have not been translated into English even though an Italina

translation seems to be available.

 

In modern times, in addition to the excellent books by Sir John

Woodruffe, which are sometimes difficult to read, there is an

excellent easy to read introductory book:

 

"Tantra, The path of Ecstasy", Georg Feuerstein, Shambhala

 

Cheers

Mukti