A TANTRIC QUEST -- Samaresh Bose

[Guest guest]

Tantric Quest

 

 

The Most Sacred Rite of the esoteric Tantric practice is the Chakra

Sadhana whereby the Yogis and Yoginis unite with each other in order to

attain the experience of Divine bliss. This is an account based on a

Tantric ritual as witnessed in the Kâmâkhya Mountains in the state

of Assam, North Eastern India, in about the 1970's by Samaresh Bose.

 

http://www.shrikali.org/tantricquest.php

[Guest guest]

Please be advised that although this claims to be an episode from the

" Kamakhya Mountains, " (such a place does not exist, though Kamakhya is

nestled in Nilachal Hills), this is not Kamakhya tradition at all, and

should not be confused as such.

 

-kulasundari

 

 

Sri Kamakhya Mahavidya Mandir

www.kamakhyamandir.org

 

 

On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 10:47 AM, Jit Majumder

<jitmajumder212wrote:

 

>

>

> Tantric Quest

>

> The Most Sacred Rite of the esoteric Tantric practice is the Chakra

> Sadhana whereby the Yogis and Yoginis unite with each other in order to

> attain the experience of Divine bliss. This is an account based on a

> Tantric ritual as witnessed in the Kâmâkhya Mountains in the state

> of Assam, North Eastern India, in about the 1970's by Samaresh Bose.

>

> http://www.shrikali.org/tantricquest.php

>

>

>

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

, Kulasundari Devi <sundari wrote:

<<<Please be advised that although this claims to be an episode from the >

" Kamakhya Mountains, " (such a place does not exist, though Kamakhya is > nestled

in Nilachal Hills), this is not Kamakhya tradition at all, and > should not be

confused as such.>>>

 

 

The introduction to the essay is part of the essay itself, and is not the

information/ introduction/ view of the poster but that of the author himself.

That apart, the Nilachal Hills is often referred to as the " Kamakhya Hills "

colloqually (among Bengalis), because of its famous landmark.

The author only seems to put on record and share his own experiences which he

had gained in that particular place and among those adepts, and himself does not

seem aware of, or attempting to comment on, the tradition he describes and the

rituals he narrates. He himself appears to be a layman who does not claim to be

tantra-literate or familiar with which tradition comes from where.

 

regards -- Jit.

[Guest guest]

how many can do a bairavi chakra now? Real one not just bang bang thank you m'am

type chakras please.

 

--- On Sun, 7/26/09, Jit Majumder <jitmajumder212 wrote:

 

 

Jit Majumder <jitmajumder212

A TANTRIC QUEST -- Samaresh Bose

 

Sunday, July 26, 2009, 11:17 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tantric Quest

 

The Most Sacred Rite of the esoteric Tantric practice is the Chakra

Sadhana whereby the Yogis and Yoginis unite with each other in order to

attain the experience of Divine bliss. This is an account based on a

Tantric ritual as witnessed in the Kâmâkhya Mountains in the state

of Assam, North Eastern India, in about the 1970's by Samaresh Bose.

 

http://www.shrikali .org/tantricques t.php

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

While this is all true (and I'm aware of the colloquialism regarding

" Kamakhya Mountains, " but was terribly inelegant in making the correction...

it's significant here that it was not referred to by its proper name), there

are many people who confuse accounts such as this with the Kamakhya

tradition itself. I've seen a lot of this kind of thing, and in fact this

particular essay has been pointed out to me before to be indicative of the

Kamakhya tradition (which it is not). I am not making commentary positive or

negative on any particular practice or sadhana, as I feel we are all MAA's

children and if SHE accepts all sincere worship, and accepts all people as

HER own, then how can I do otherwise?

But I also feel that whenever these kinds of things are posted, it's

important to present a counterpoint for balance. This is routinely done for

other Devis and places and practices, so why not for Kamakhya?

 

jai MAA

-kulasundari

 

Sri Kamakhya Mahavidya Mandir

www.kamakhyamandir.org

 

On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 8:44 AM, riktanandanath

<jitmajumder212wrote:

 

>

>

> <%40>,

> Kulasundari Devi <sundari wrote:

> <<<Please be advised that although this claims to be an episode from the >

> " Kamakhya Mountains, " (such a place does not exist, though Kamakhya is >

> nestled in Nilachal Hills), this is not Kamakhya tradition at all, and >

> should not be confused as such.>>>

>

> The introduction to the essay is part of the essay itself, and is not the

> information/ introduction/ view of the poster but that of the author

> himself.

> That apart, the Nilachal Hills is often referred to as the " Kamakhya Hills "

> colloqually (among Bengalis), because of its famous landmark.

> The author only seems to put on record and share his own experiences which

> he had gained in that particular place and among those adepts, and himself

> does not seem aware of, or attempting to comment on, the tradition he

> describes and the rituals he narrates. He himself appears to be a layman who

> does not claim to be tantra-literate or familiar with which tradition comes

> from where.

>

> regards -- Jit.

>

>

>

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

<<<how many can do a bairavi chakra now? Real one not just bang bang

thank you m'am type chakras please.>>>

 

The point is not how many can do it " now " . It is something that was

never doable or approachable by the general multitude to start with. It

needs a preparation, a certain conditioning, an solid grounding and a

transformed consciousness. And it can be seen in that essay itself --

what sort of training and transformation of consciousness is required --

and to show that was my objective behind sharing the essay. Tantra-marga

has never tried to test its " mass appeal " or has never tried to enter

any " popularity contest " . Shakti-sadhana is for a " class " , its not for

the " mass " . True spirituality does not judge its own intrinsic value or

validity by the number of its adherents or votaries, or its demographic

reach.

A bhairavi chakra by definition is a " real one " , and there can be no

" real chakra " and " unreal chakra " any more than there can be a " perfect

circle " and and " imperfect circle " . a circle is by definition perfect.

if it is not geometrically perfect and fulfills all the conditions

required for a figure to be called a circle, then it is NOT a circle.

similarly, it is either a bhairavi chakra or it is not. the same things

becomes a chakra -- a sacred ritual and worship of Shakti, when your

training, cognition and consciousness is of one kind. and the same thing

can be just sex only in the mundane sense, if your training, cognition

and consciousness is of another kind.

 

For a true spiritualist, and for a true shakti sadhaka, the aim should

only be to BE like that, and to DO that. Certainly not to just ask

-- " how many can do it? " and leave it at that, and make that the end of

his " quest " .

 

Thanks -- Jit.

 

 

 

 

 

, sankara menon <kochu1tz

wrote:

>

> how many can do a bairavi chakra now? Real one not just bang bang

thank you m'am type chakras please.

>

> --- On Sun, 7/26/09, Jit Majumder jitmajumder212 wrote:

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

<<<There are many people who confuse accounts such as this with the

Kamakhya tradition itself. I've seen a lot of this kind of thing, and in

fact this particular essay has been pointed out to me before to be

indicative of the Kamakhya tradition (which it is not).>>>

 

Firstly, I wonder what you could have meant by " accounts such as this "

-- it would have been easier for me to reply had you been more specific.

Anyways, I guess that by " this " you mean the account of the maithuna

ritual which the sadhakas-sadhikas engaged in.

 

It depends on what you mean you you say " Kamakhya tradition " . The

Kamakhya tradition is but the Kaula tradition, and Kamakhya has for ages

been the prime seat, the heart, the " captital " of Virachari/ Kaula

sadhana. Kamakhya-Pitha is the most sacred yoni-pitha -- the seat or

power-centre of She who is the " embodiment of Kama (desire) Herself "

(Kamarupini/ KamarupA). Kamakhya is in fact THE centre of the Kaula

tradition, and THE most important centre of the Kaula way of sadhana.

 

Maithuna, along with the other rituals that make up the

" pancha-'M'-kara " , is an integral part of the Kaula, Siddhanta and Vama

acharas. That is irrespective of what individual sadhakas-sadhikas

learn, practice or limit themselves to in modern times, and that is also

independent of the kind of initiation to the kind of practice (achara)

one might be receiving from his/her initiator according his/her level of

spiritual development and capacity. That is also irrespective of what

the mode of worship/sadhana (what is included or what is excluded) is in

various centres in India and abroad -- that were founded on the

tradition of and inspiration from the Kamakhya-pitha (like your own

Kamakhya Mandir in the US).

 

But that itself does not make the Kaula tradition of the ancient

Kamakhya Pitha itself " not the kamakhya tradition " -- if that's what

you have tried to mean.

 

 

 

<<<I am not making commentary positive or negative on any particular

practice or sadhana, as I feel we are all MAA's children and if SHE

accepts all sincere worship, and accepts all people as HER own, then how

can I do otherwise?>>>

 

The question is not whether She accepts all sincere worship. That is

obvious and beyond question.

 

The question is, how much WE understand about " sincerity " or

'insincerity " , and what is OUR idea of what is " sincere " and what is

" insincere " . The question is, whether WE leave it upto the Mother to

judge the 'sincerity " or " insincerity " of something, or whether WE take

it upon ourselves to be the arbriters in plac eof the Mother inside us,

and label something " sincere " or " insincere " accordsing to the

artificial, superficial, delusional and counterfeit constructs,

paradigms and values of our limited, untransformed egoes.

 

Maa accepts all worship -- because after all it is She who has become

everything, and it is only She that exists, and nothing else is other

then her manifestation. The question is, how many people learn to see

things with Her perspective, instead of seeing things with their own

limited, conditioned, unconscious perspectives? We finish our job by

saying " Ma accepts everything " , but what about asking ourselves whether

WE accept everything and learn to see things in their essence?

 

There is no seperate " sincere worship " and " insincere worship " . worship

is by definition " sincere " . if it is not sincere, it is not worship --

no matter how showy or how proper it is. and if it is sincere, then it

is worship. to thos3e who understand the jist of the Tantrik ideal --

eating, sleeping or having sex can be worship -- if it is done in an

AWARE and CONSCIOUS state of mind -- with the mid free from any/all

artificial constructs and paradigms.

 

" sincerity " or 'insincerity " is inside US, not inside the particular

RITE or RITUAL. It is the way the human mind approaches something, looks

at something, that makes something sincere or insincere. nothing in this

universe is by itself " pure " or " impure " , sincere or insincere -- except

what we see them as -- depending on our conditionings. there is but ONE

way, and, depending on us, that same way can be the way by which we can

fall, and it can be the way by which we can rise.

 

To give you a good example that you might at once understand -- in your

own culture (the one you were born into) the same " eating the flesh and

drinking the blood of christ " can be viewed as " holy communion " by one

mind, and the same ritual can be (justly, and correctly) viewed as

psychological cannibalism by another mind.

 

 

 

<<<But I also feel that whenever these kinds of things are posted, it's

important to present a counterpoint for balance. This is routinely done

for other Devis and places and practices, so why not for Kamakhya? >>>

 

Again, I wish you had specified, without my trying to guess, what you

mean by " these kind of things " . I am at once reminded of the kind of

vague language the prudish victorian english used, to avoid mentioning

things or pronounce words/terms/phrases that they, with their version of

" morality " , considered " improper " or " vulgar " . To them, mentioning an

anatomical part like " legs " was " vulgar " , and they used the term " lower

limb " . I hope you are not under the burden of the same kind of

" propriety " , when you say " these kind of things " ?? IF (pls correct if I

have guesses wrongly) that is so, next time just say freely " sexual

rites " , or say " maithuna " . This is why I said just above -- that Maa

accepting everything (which is all but she herself) is not the question

or issue at all -- the question or issue is whether you accept

everything spontaneously.

 

As for a " counterpoint for balance " -- well, I fail to see where I have

gone " off balance " in the first place, to need counter balancing!! But

of course I will wait for others to come up with what THEY would think

is a " counter balance " !

 

 

 

Thanks -- Jit.

 

 

 

 

 

 

, Kulasundari Devi <sundari

wrote:

>

> While this is all true (and I'm aware of the colloquialism regarding

> " Kamakhya Mountains, " but was terribly inelegant in making the

correction...