Guest guest Posted February 6, 2004 Report Share Posted February 6, 2004 , "Devi Bhakta" <devi_bhakta> wrote: > Q: Well, Tantra in general doesn't seem to be an aescetic path. > > A: That's right, it's not. I am not sure if one can say that tantra is not an ascetic path. I will leave that to experts on tantra. It might be interesting to know that Shri Amritananda's own teacher is a sanyasi(ascetic) and his sanyasa name is Swami Svaprakashananda Tirtha(due to personal reasons, I have deep respect for this particular sanyasi eventhough I never talked to, nor seen him). He is well versed in tantra shastra and a master of 70 million mantras. Shri Amritananda's paramaguru (teacher's teacher) also happens to be a sanyasa. The author of the great work SriVidyarnava tantra also happens to be a sanyasi,the great Vidyaranya Swamin. Infact tantra shastra in the past and even now is practiced and taught by so many sanyasis. Even Adi Shankara taught tantra in his work Prapancha Sara tantra and taught Srividya in Saundaryalahari. Not to mention Shakta nanda tarangini is written by Brahmananda Giri which is a sanyasa name. And Tara Bhakti tarangini is written by Shri prakASAnanda sarasvatI who is a sanyasi and a great teacher of advaita. There have been numerous commentaries on tantras and parts of tantras by various ascetics(Sanyasis). While I dont know if tantra is a non-ascetic path or not it is a path very much followed by ascetics even from the time of Adi Shankara(8th century), not to mention his Guru Govinda Bhagavatpada acharya is thought to be by some as the author the Jayadratha Yamala tantra and his paramaguru Gaudapada is credited with the authorship of Subhagodaya Stuti( a work on Srividya) and SriVidya ratna Sutras. > Q: As I understand it, in Tantra, desire is accepted as a > spontaneous manifestation of the Divine within the human mind and/or > personality. The fulfillment of desire seems to be accepted as well. > I think of the statements of Krsna to Arjuna when He says that He is > any desire that is *not* opposed to Dharma. So it seems natural > within this context to use what talents and skills you have to > achieve your desires -- siddhis just being another very human skill. > > A: I would disagree with that. First, Bhagavad Gita is not a Tantric > document, and Krishna is not really speaking about siddhis. Second, > siddhis are not a "very human skill"; they are small > manifestations of Divine Power (Shakti). Given that most of the above mentioned sanyasis commented(if not, it is definitely part of their study) on the BhagavadGita I would assume that it is not in direct opposition to principles of tantra. Whoever wants to follow Shaktism or tantra, it is a good idea to read the book Principles of Tantra(available in two vols) translated by Sir Arthur Avalon. This is one of the most authentic books written on tantra shastra according to some. It summarises tantra and shakta principles as followed and practiced by the majority of Tantrics/Shaktas. Rgds Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 6, 2004 Report Share Posted February 6, 2004 Namaste Sw. Prem Vedarthi, Satish & DB Thank you all for your valuable input on the siddhis & tantra. SPV, can you cite the work by Abhinavaguptha that you referenced in your previous Email. ~SE101 , "Satish Arigela" <satisharigela> wrote: > , "Devi Bhakta" > <devi_bhakta> wrote: > > Q: Well, Tantra in general doesn't seem to be an aescetic path. > > > > A: That's right, it's not. > > > I am not sure if one can say that tantra is not an ascetic path. > I will leave that to experts on tantra. > > It might be interesting to know that Shri Amritananda's own > teacher is a sanyasi(ascetic) and his sanyasa name is Swami > Svaprakashananda Tirtha(due to personal reasons, I have deep respect > for this particular sanyasi eventhough I never talked to, nor seen > him). He is well versed in tantra shastra and a master of 70 million > mantras. Shri Amritananda's paramaguru (teacher's teacher) also > happens to be a sanyasa. > > The author of the great work SriVidyarnava tantra also happens to > be a sanyasi,the great Vidyaranya Swamin. Infact tantra shastra in > the past and even now is practiced and taught by so many sanyasis. > Even Adi Shankara taught tantra in his work Prapancha Sara tantra > and taught Srividya in Saundaryalahari. Not to mention Shakta nanda > tarangini is written by Brahmananda Giri which is a sanyasa name. > And Tara Bhakti tarangini is written by Shri prakASAnanda sarasvatI > who is a sanyasi and a great teacher of advaita. There have been > numerous commentaries on tantras and parts of tantras by various > ascetics(Sanyasis). > > While I dont know if tantra is a non-ascetic path or not it is a > path very much followed by ascetics even from the time of Adi > Shankara(8th century), not to mention his Guru Govinda Bhagavatpada > acharya is thought to be by some as the author the Jayadratha Yamala > tantra and his paramaguru Gaudapada is credited with the > authorship of Subhagodaya Stuti( a work on Srividya) and SriVidya > ratna Sutras. > > > > Q: As I understand it, in Tantra, desire is accepted as a > > spontaneous manifestation of the Divine within the human mind > and/or > > personality. The fulfillment of desire seems to be accepted as > well. > > I think of the statements of Krsna to Arjuna when He says that He > is > > any desire that is *not* opposed to Dharma. So it seems natural > > within this context to use what talents and skills you have to > > achieve your desires -- siddhis just being another very human > skill. > > > > A: I would disagree with that. First, Bhagavad Gita is not a > Tantric > > document, and Krishna is not really speaking about siddhis. > Second, > > siddhis are not a "very human skill"; they are small > > manifestations of Divine Power (Shakti). > > Given that most of the above mentioned sanyasis commented(if not, > it is definitely part of their study) on the BhagavadGita I would > assume that it is not in direct opposition to principles of tantra. > > Whoever wants to follow Shaktism or tantra, it is a good idea to > read the book Principles of Tantra(available in two vols) translated > by Sir Arthur Avalon. This is one of the most authentic books > written on tantra shastra according to some. It summarises tantra > and shakta principles as followed and practiced by the majority of > Tantrics/Shaktas. > > > Rgds Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 6, 2004 Report Share Posted February 6, 2004 Namaste! The book I am looking at is: Abhinavagupta's Commentary on the Bhagavad Gita translated from Sanskrit with Introduction and Notes by Boris Marjanovic Indica Books, Varanasi 2002 I am not always in agreement with Mr. Marjanovic's translation, but all-in-all it is a most valuable reference work. It's listed as out of print, but I did find a copy among amazon.com's marketplace sellers. Prema sunelectric101 wrote: > Namaste Sw. Prem Vedarthi, Satish & DB > > Thank you all for your valuable input on the siddhis & tantra. > SPV, can you cite the work by Abhinavaguptha that you referenced > in your previous Email. > > ~SE101 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 7, 2004 Report Share Posted February 7, 2004 Dear Satish Arigela, You make an interesting point. The great Tibetan tantric Milarepa certainly was known as an ascetic. Furthermore, and a bit closer to this group's context, we can look at this passage I found in The Secret of the Three Cities by Douglas Renfrew Brooks: "An association with the Shankara tradition allows intellectually austere Tantrics, like Bhaskaraya, to assert that worldy involvements and pleasures are strictly secondary to the higher goal of liberation. While he does not go so far as to advance the necessity of renunciation in obtaining liberation, a requirement as far as Shankara is concerned, he is able to transform the ideal Shrividya adept into a thoroughly worldly but at once restrained and ascetical figure. In this relatively late form of Tantrism, Bhaskaraya achieves a remarkable synthesis that reconciles the inherent conflict between renunciate (sannyasin) and Brahman householder ideals: the Tantric householder is himself an ideal ascetic, one who is completely in the world but not of it.î (p.93) That last statement about being completely in the world but not of it was how sannyas was explained to me by my master Bhagawan Shree Rajneesh/Osho. Sw. Prem Vedarthi .. Satish Arigela wrote: > , "Devi Bhakta" > <devi_bhakta> wrote: > > Q: Well, Tantra in general doesn't seem to be an aescetic path. > > > > A: That's right, it's not. > > > I am not sure if one can say that tantra is not an ascetic path. > I will leave that to experts on tantra. > > > > While I dont know if tantra is a non-ascetic path or not it is a > path very much followed by ascetics even from the time of Adi > Shankara(8th century), not to mention his Guru Govinda Bhagavatpada > acharya is thought to be by some as the author the Jayadratha Yamala > tantra and his paramaguru Gaudapada is credited with the > authorship of Subhagodaya Stuti( a work on Srividya) and SriVidya > ratna Sutras. > > > Rgds > > > ------------------------------ > Links > > * > / > > * > > > * Terms of > Service. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.