To: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.magick.tantra,talk.religion.misc Subject: "Liber Tantra" (LONG, many responses) Summary: This is a compilaton of survey responses on the subject of 'tantra'. Keywords: tantra, questions, surveys, compilation REVISED/UPDATED 49991028 Below please find about a number of responses to a survey I posted several times in soc.religion.eastern and other newsgroups. They are intended as educational files and not as The Answers, especially since they seem to VARY! ;> editor ----------------------------------------------------------- surveys begin [Nagasiva] posted the questions and here I try to share shortly what I have learned during the years I've practiced tantra yoga. First I must make a notion that for me tantra is not sex nor any sexual practice, though surely it has affected my sex-life. |What is tantra? Tantra is an ancient integrated system of spirituality. It is a way and a science of liberation (tra), liberation from crudeness (ta) or liberation through expansion (tan). |What are its elements? Indians might say unit consciousness (jiiva) and Cosmic Consciousness (Purusha), for the liberation is the unification of those two. More widely one could say that basic concepts - at least some of them - are: Cosmic Consciousness (Purusha/Shiva), Cosmic Energy (Prakrti/Shakti), their unmanifested combination (Nirguna Brahma), manifested combination (Saguna Brahma), involution (Saincara), evolution (Pratisaincara), action (Karma), knowledge (Jinana), devotion (Bhakti), reactions of the actions (Samskara), spiritual practice (Sadhana), liberation (Mukti and Moksa) and dispeller of darkness (Guru). |What distinguishes tantra from non-tantra? I think if something doesn't lead one towards liberation cannot be called tantra. Of course one could say that if it's not from the tantric tradition so it's non-tantra, but how do traditions come up? |Is tantra an attitude, a belief or practice? It's a practical science, so one can apply it in ones life as an attitude, it's not a belief but as anything it requires an open mind to be tried out in practice and it surely is an practice. |Are there common elements in its practice, if it has any? This one is difficult, but I would say that holism and openess, which also explain very much why those sexual practices that are most widely popularized as tantra ever came up. |How do these relate to any common attitudes or beliefs? They are as I said usually more open and holistic than 'common thinking'. Also there is a lot of mysticism in tantra, for it IS mysticism - a pursuit to unite with the infinite. Another good explanation for all the confusion around tantra. |Is it religion(s) or a movement within religion(s)? It's not a religion, it's a spiritual science, which can and has been applied in many religions. |Is it separate from religion entirely? No. |Can Tantra be found in Hinduism, Buddhism and Taoism? Surely. |Are there Western equivalents? I'm not familiar with them but I would say yes. Even the Finnish epic Kalevala and it's lost practices can be interpreted with the tantric concepts of the human mind and the universe. |Where did Tantra start? Tantra started in what we nowadays call India around 10000-8000 years ago. It was part of the culture of the Dravidians, who lived there at that time just as the Aryans who around that time were migrating there from the north had their vedic culture. Tantra was first systemized by Sadashiva or Shiva around 7500 years ago. Here's again a chance to get confused - well, if Shiva really was the first tantric master he could not have four arms, three wives though probably. |Is it possible for it to die out? No. :) |Is there an 'ideal' Tantra, regardless how it manifests today? Shiva set the ideal and I think it can still be followed, just if we could only know what he said and did. The tantric texts (64 tantras etc.) were written down only later, they are hard to find at least in English, they are really cryptic (maybe the biggest reason for all the ul's to understand tantra as a sexual practice beacause of the symbolic language used in describing the spiritual unification - maithuna) and even then they are 'just texts'. From time to time have tantric masters appeared on this planet, renewed the teachings and practices and created changes. Nothing is to be discarded just because it does not belong to the 'tantric tradition' - everything should be examined and found out how much truth and practical value it has. Neither is there no reason to include anything and everything under tantra just because tantra is very tolerant and open. |What are the essentials of 'tantric philosophy' if there is such a thing? |How does this relate to modern Eastern or Western philosophical models? There surely is tantric philosophy and there could be discussion about the western philosophies and tantra but that's not my area of interest. I hope I've answered to some of this already and want just to add a few books I've found enlightening: Namah Shivaya Shantaya by Shrii Shrii Anandamurti The Wisdom of Tantra by Acharya Vedaprajinananda Avadhuta The Serpent Power by Arthur Avalon alias Sir John Woodroffe -- Antti Kivivalli atma moksartham jagat hitayaca =================================================== next survey begins |What is tantra? From what I've heard, Tantra is a form of practice in which one uses one's everyday, common experiences to further Buddhist practice. | What are its elements? Your common experiences. | What distinguishes tantra from non-tantra? If you use your common experience as a way of furthering your Buddhist practice, that is tantra. If you just experience your common experiences in a common way, that is not tantra. |Is tantra an attitude, a belief or practice? It could be anything. It doesn't matter what you do, it matters why you do it. | Are there common elements in its practice, if it has any? Let me rephrase the question - Does Joe's tantric practice resemble Kathy's? It might, it might not. |Is it religion(s) or a movement within religion(s)? What is a religion? | Is it separate from religion entirely? I don't know. | Can Tantra be found in Hinduism, Buddhism and Taoism? Sure. Tantra can be practiced within the framework of eastern philosophies. | Are there Western equivalents? Sure. Tantra can be practiced within the framework of western philosophies. |Where did Tantra start? I don't know. Probably nowhere. | Is it possible for it to die out? I don't know. Probably not. | Is there an 'ideal' Tantra, regardless how it manifests today? Certainly not. |What are the essentials of 'tantric philosophy' if there is such a thing? The essential is meditation. The goal is to realize Buddha nature. There are many, many ways to do this. Tantra is one of them. Tantra is all of them. Tantra is none of them. There is no tantric philosophy. |How does this relate to modern Eastern or Western philosophical models? In the usual way. :) joshp@cmu.edu /o)\ Silent \(o/ Thunder =================================================== next survey begins ~Date: Fri, 10 Jul 92 11:39:51 EDT ~From: Raja Seth What is Tantra? I attended a lecture on Tantra here in the Vedanta Center. This what I remember from the lecture. The word Tantra comes from the Sanskrit root "tan" meaning "to spread". So Tantra meant "a book which spreads knowledge". Earlier any book could be called as Tantra but in due course of time the word Tantra came to identify only "certain" kind of knowledge. So tantra does not refer to a single book but a collection of books. Old India is assumed to have three different regions and each region had 60 books under Tantra giving rise to total 180 books. The school of Tantra is as old as Vedic school and was developed in parallel to Vedic literature. The Tantras spread to Tibet, China etc and it mixed with others Tantras there. Also, Tantra from Tibet, China etc travelled to India and got mixed with exisiting Indian/Hindu Tantra. The concept of Kundalini (spiritual energy), Chakras (7 spiritual centers on the spinal chord) etc are coming from Tantra rather than from Vedic Philosophy. Most of present day Hindu rituals are based on Tantra. The ritualistic worship is wholely based on Tantra. For example, the Disha-bandhan (nyasa: to create protective spiritual shield), Shodasha-Upachaar Pujaa (16 course worship?) etc are described in Tantras. |>Does it have aspects in Buddhism, Hinduism and Taoism? Yes. All of them have commmon (due to influences) and unique Tantras. I have no idea about Tantra's in Buddhism or Taoism but I have heard/read that they have their own Tantras. |>Are there Christian or other orthodox western equivalents? Have no idea! |>Is it a religion or simply a movement within religion? Since Hinduism as such is a set of different schools, Tantra in Hinduism is a school of Hinduism and its authority is accepted by Vedic Philosophy. |>Is it separate from religion entirely? Not in Hinduism. It is very much part of Hinduism. |>Is it an attitude? Hinduism believes that one must follow a spiritual practise which will enhance one's natural inclination. So Tantra is "one" of many paths indentified as paths for God realization. One must have an inclination for that path. |>What are its elements? |>What distinguishes Tantra from non-Tantra? As mentioned above, now specific books and their philosophy are called as Tantra. So rest is non-tantra. |>When did it start? For Hindu Tantra, it started in parallel to Vedic school. |>Is it possible for it to die out? Not in its entirety, though parts have been lost and will be lost. As long as there is idol worship, concept of Kundalini and chakras, etc., Hindu Tantra will exist! |>What are the essentials of its 'philosophy' if it has one? To unite the jiva (soul) via sushumna (through arousing the Kundalini) with the Ishwara (cosmic soul). |>How does it relate to modern Eastern or Western philosophical models? What are the "modern" philosophical models? I have no idea about it. As far as my understanding of Hinduism goes, one can not differentaite philosophy from religion because philosophy in Sanskrit is known as "darshan" i.e. seeing/experiencing rather than just theoretical hypothesis. So if modern philosophical models are put forward by theoreticians like us, then Tantra differs from it in the sense that it has been put forward by people who followed the path and experienced "realization" through it. [some excerpted - tn] Umesh... =================================================== next survey begins From: "Antar" Subject: Re: Tantra Questions (was New to tantra) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 20:34:27 -0800 nagasiva wrote...: >---------- FOR ANYBODY WHO'D CARE TO POST THEIR RESPONSE -------- > >SURVEY QUESTIONS: Tantra >__________________________________________________________________ > >1.0.0 General > 1.1.0 What is tantra? What are its elements? The word "tantra" itself has several possible origins in this context. It is most likely based upon a Sanskrit root meaning "to weave", but there's also a good argument that it comes from a different root which means "to expand". Because there are so many different Tantric schools, many of the elements one finds in the various Tantras can be very different. The most common elements in Tantra are: 1) The use of some form of a rite usually referred to as "Pancamakara", literally "5 things that begin with the letter M". Usually (but not always), these five elements are considered to be maithuna (sexual union of two genders), matsya (fish), mudra (parched grains), red meat (mamsa), and wine (mada). Note that different schools interpreted these five to be different specific things. For some, mamsa was the flesh of a goat; for others, the flesh of a human corpse; for still others they were abstract, completely symbolic terms denoting states of consciousness and proximity to deity. 2) The use of mantra, yantra and mudra. As far as I'm aware, there's not a single Tantric school that doesn't rely heavily on the use of all of these. 3) The belief that liberation (moksha) isn't necessarily a reward of the afterlife. The Tantric strain is unique in Indian thought in that it believes in some variant of jivanmukti ("liberation in one's lifetime"). 4) The identification of the sadhaka with the deity. This is a strain of thought that probably arose in Tantra from a very grass-roots, folk- religion source. The Tantric adept's goal is union with some version of the infinite divine. I think if these four elements are present, I'd call whatever-it- called-itself a Tantric school. I find Austin Spare's work, for example, to be very close to Tantra on all but the first count, and I have reason to think from his writings that he likely engaged in some variant of pancamakara as well. > 1.1.1 Is tantra a yoga? Yes. Any given Tantra emobodies a yoga (yoga=a wayof achieving things; a set of techniques directed toward some magickal/mystical/spiritual end). > 1.1.2 Is tantra a religion, or a movement within religion(s), > or is it entirely separate from religion? Any of the three are possible, at least at the level where religion is equated with some popular belief system. It is a religion (really a group of several religions) in its own right. They do rely on some concept of "something bigger and more powerful," so on that level they are definitely religions. Tantra arose as an anti-complexity religious movement initially. The Vedic, Brahminic rites had become so complex that they generated an entire class of full-time religious people who demanded something in return for the performance of important rites. The price was frequently very high, and some rites were so complex that they could only be performed properly by over a dozen priests. They abstracted their religion and kept much basic information hidden to insure their employment. Tantra, at this level, is an attempt to make direct communion possible once again, and to allow low-caste types access to a spiritual life and magickal technique. Much of Tantric technique, however, doesn't rely heavily on belief. One need only be able to visualize a deity, for example... it wasn't necessary to believe that the deity in question had any existence of its own. The Mahavidyas, an important group of 10 shaktis, for example, exist only in a relational state with the sadhaka. So Tantric technique can be divorced from religious faith. > 1.2.0 What distinguishes tantra from non-tantra? See the above basic elements. > 1.3.0 What is the exact relationship between tantra and sexuality? Physical sexual union is employed as a technique both as part of the pancamakara and separately from it.. in some Tantric schools. Others councilled physical celibacy. In both cases, however, what we can loosely term "sexual desire" is to be brought under control within the context of the yoga embodied by the Tantra in question. In all cases, however, all Tantras envision the universe and the basis of all reality to be some sort of sexual union between a male (some version of Shiva or Vishnu in most cases) and female (some version of Kali, Durga, etc.) deity. The Krama school termed the state of Shiva's union with Shakti "anutara", a state of being "higher" than either Shiva or Shakti uncoupled. >2.0.0 Practice > 2.1.0 Is tantra an attitude, a belief, or a practice? Tantras are based in practice. There are usually accompanying beliefs, but that could be said of anything. I'm not aware of a particular Tantric attitude. > 2.1.1 Are there common elements in its practice, if it has any? > If so, how do these relate to any common attitudes or beliefs? > When you say you "practice tantra"; what do you do exactly? Again, see the answer to the first question. Much of what I do is very private and involves others, so I would feel it a bit of an invasion of privacy to reveal exactly what I do in detail. I use a variant of the pancamakara, and all of the other elements listed as techniques. Some of the particular rituals I've been involved with are archived on my website (in the Workings section) >3.0.0 Origins/Ideals > 3.1.0 Where and when did tantra start, if it had an origin? The earliest Tantric literature dates to the 9th century, but formal Tantric schools probably existed for a couple of centuries before that. There are what appear to be very early, Tantra-like practices preserved in such works as the Rgvidhana, which dates back to around 400 BC. Tantra originated in what is today India; the exact location is anyone's guess. Some scholars think that there is evidence of Tantric practice evidenced in artifacts from the Harappa civilization... which could date the whole thing back to 3000 BC, or even earlier. > 3.1.1 Are there certain types of cultures where it arises? It arises in cultures influenced by Indian culture. It spread at least as far as China, Cambodia and Indonesia in ancient times. More recently, it's also cropped up all over the world... especially in Germany, France, the UK and the US. > 3.1.2 Are there historical or fictional people associated with > its origins? Hundreds. > 3.2.0 Is there an 'ideal' tantra, regardless of how it manifests > today? If so, what is this like? Ideal as compared to what? > 3.3.0 Is there an objective or ideal focus of the common tantric? > If so, what is it? Again, see the answers to the first question. > 3.4.0 What are the essentials of 'tantric philosophy' if there > is such a thing? There were lots of them. Volumes have been written about this subject. The best comparative study of Tantric philosophies may well be Bharati's "The Tantric Tradition". The works of Abhinavagupta, the flagship author of the Kramakaula, is preserved in such works as his foundational "Tantraloka", the Paratrisika Vivarana, etc. It seems at great variance with the Vijnanabhairava, one of the earliest Tantric texts. This is a broad spectrum. > 3.5.0 How does this relate to other Eastern or Western philosophies? In ways too many to discuss without getting a PhD for the effort of typing it all up. >4.0.0 Sociological/Cultural > 4.1.0 Are there certain sects of religious traditions which > consider themselves or are considered by others to be 'tantric'? Yes, many of them. > 4.2.0 Are there Western forms of tantra or rough equivalents? There are certainly Western adaptations of Tantra that possess all of the necessary elements. I haven't come across anything inidigenous in the West that I'd consider any sort of equivalent. > 4.3.0 Can tantra be found in Hinduism, Buddhism, and Taoism? > If so, in what forms and characters? Again, any useful discussion of this would constitute writing a book. Whether it influenced Taoism much is pretty debatable. It was more likely the other way around, particularly through the work of Chinese "siddhas" such as Bhogar. There are certainly Tantric Hindu and Buddhist schools. > 4.4.0 Why do people get excited and mention sex when they hear > the word tantra? Because people like to think about sex. I've read that the average American thinks about sex every few minutes. Certain unscrupulous authors, publishing companies and newage con artists have seized upon the sexual element of Tantra to generate income for themselves. Sex sells, and the more such things sell, the more people (consumers) are taught that Tantra and sex are synonymous. > 4.5.0 What inhibits tantra, what stimulates it, and what kinds of > people are more likely to practice it? Nothing necessarily inhibits Tantra. It's stimulated by practicing it. I can't think of a particular Tantric type... even in ancient times, Tantrikas comprised a wide array of individuals, ranging from forest-dwelling ascetics to householding citizens to decadent royalty. That situation hasn't changed much, nor do I think it should. Tantric adepts have ranged from cerebral, refined philosophers like Abhinavagupta to schools like the Aghoris, perhaps best known for indulging in "base" practices including having anal sex with dogs and then sucking their semen back out in order to avoid it's leaving their bodies permanently. > 4.5.1 Is it possible for tantra to die out? Certainly. >5.0.0 Personal > 5.1.0 What is your relationship to tantric culture? I don't know that there's such a thing as "Tantric culture". I did get initiated into a Tantric lineage, but my contact with others of said lineage is somewhat limited. > 5.1.1 Do you have some authority in it such that your responses > ought reflect a knowledge other internet users may lack? I like to think so. Others may disagree. I'd think they were wrong, too. > 5.2.0 If you practice tantra, how long have you been doing this? Approximately two years. Tzimon Yliaster =================================================== next survey begins To: [nagasiva] From: SwVirato@aol.com Date: Sun, 2 May 1999 10:56:30 EDT Subject: Re: Questions on Tantra [nagasiva] writes: # SURVEY QUESTIONS: Tantra # __________________________________________________________________ # # 1.0.0 General # # 1.1.0 What is tantra? The Art of Love # 1.1.1 What are its elements? Is tantra a yoga? Some call it Tantra Yoga..If we see yoga as union, then I agree. Others say Tantra is not a part of Yoga which most people see as Hatha Yoga anyway, but an entire lifestyle. This is How Swami Virato sees it. # 1.1.2 Is tantra a religion, or a movement within religion(s), # or is it entirely separate from religion? Tantra is not a religion. It is a spiritual path. When religion enters, then barriers are drawn. However, some call Tantra a religion, although there is no organized body of thought or practitioners as such. # 1.2.0 What distinguishes tantra from non-tantra? Historic/cultural Tantra follows many rituals, yantra and mantra. Neo-tantra is an adaptation by a particular teacher. Few follow in classical/hisoric/cultrual tantra, which can be read in boring texts. Swami Virato teaches authentic Tantra for the 21st Century # 1.3.0 What is the exact relationship between tantra and sexuality? In Tantra, sexuality is total and filled with bliss. However, Tantra is not sex. Sex practiced or perfomred in Tantra is what is taught by most teachers of this spiritual lifestyle. # 2.0.0 Practice # # 2.1.0 Is tantra an attitude, a belief, or a practice? No belief. Yes, it is an attitude and there are practices, in sex and other areas of life that can be used as tools. Many of these include contemporary conscious psychotherapeutic methods. # 2.1.1 Are there common elements in its practice, if it has any? # If so, how do these relate to any common attitudes or beliefs? # When you say you"practice" Tantra, what do you do exactly? Tantra is a lifestyle of letting-go, feeling a oneness with everything. If we were to relate Tantra to life in general, we would say there is much more lay-back liiving, more enjoyment of our sensual nature, a sexual freedom which follows a lifestyle of let go as well. Practicing Tantra is to walk our talk...to visualize others as Divine... to mediatate, get and give massages. and to say YES! more often...to seek for the purest, highest quality of life, yet to accept whatever we have...and to feel our Divine nature...God... Goddess. # 3.0.0 Origins/Ideals # # 3.1.0 Where and when did tantra start, if it had an origin? No real beginning as such. See articles at The Nepal Institute: http://newfrontier.com/nepal/ # 3.1.1 Are there certain types of cultures where it arises? Interesting question. Tantra seems to arise when we have gone too far with our material world. More of the lay-back, natural culturese like the Cherokees and polynesians follow a similar lifestyle. Some pagan traditions that are pure also do. Whenerver civilzationh has filledi ts memebers with fear, Tantra is not as popular...but desired never-the-less. # 3.1.2 Are there historical or fictional people associated with # its origins? You can see glimpes of Tantra in Krishna's playfulness, and Jesus no doubt was also a Tantrika based upon his words of love and his association with Mary of Magdalene and Veronica or Nazareth. Tilopa and Milaropa also were the so-called original messengers of Classical Tantra. Howewver, even with the wirtings of Sir Richard Burton, much has been lost to antiquity[.] # 3.2.0 Is there an 'ideal' tantra, regardless of how it manifests # today? If so, what is this like? Returning to the Biblical "Garden of Eden," or a vision of Nirvana or Heaven. A community of people without jealousy, ugliness, hate, anger, fear. but filled with unconditional love, bliss, a joy of life, tenderness and acceptance of all. # 3.3.0 Is there an objective or ideal focus of the common tantric? # If so, what is it? Not really. Maybe enjoying God's existence at every moment. # 3.4.0 What are the essentials of 'tantric philosophy' if there # is such a thing? Same as 3.3.0 # 3.5.0 How does this relate to other Eastern or Western philosophies? Most "philosophies" and religions have a dogmatic point-of-view of existense. Eastern and Western philosophies are tied up in dogma. Tantra is about dropping dogma, and simply being in bliss. This is difficult to talk about since all talk is the beginning of a philosophy. # 4.0.0 Sociological/Cultural # # 4.1.0 Are there certain sects of religious traditions which # consider themselves or are considered by others to be 'tantric'? Yes, many. Yogi Bajan of the 3HO organizaton (adapted from the Sikh tradtion) considers his path "white" Tantra. Pagan tradtions call it Tantrik practice, Tibetan Buddhists follow a Tantra path (commonly called yellow Tantra), and aspects of Voodoo use black Tantra. This is only a sampling. There are many texts avaialble on Classical tantra in new age book shops and select libraries. Swami Virato follows the path of red Tantra...for the passion of flesh and spirit. # 4.2.0 Are there Western forms of tantra or rough equivalents? Not really. Perhaps what is being taught by most teachers today coul be called Western forms. Quodoshka was a similar form practiced by Native Americans (Cherokee). # 4.3.0 Can Tantra be found in Hinduism, Buddhism, and Taoism? # If so, in what forms and characters? Yes. Read the texts. # 4.4.0 Why do people get excited and mention sex when they hear # the word tantra? Because sex sells, and most Tantra teachers accent this portion of the Tantric lifestlye in their courses, workshops and seminars. # 4.5.0 What inhibits tantra, what stimulates it, and what kinds of # people are more likely to practice it? Fear and a closed mind inhibit living the Tantric life, while dance, other movement and pranyama (various breathing techiniques) stimulate it. People who are adventurous and open are more likely to connect to a Tantric lifestyle. # 4.5.1 Is it possible for tantra to die out? Never! # 5.0.0 Personal # # 5.1.0 What is your relationship to tantric culture? I have been into it since I was seven years old. # 5.1.1 Do you have some authority in it such that your responses # ought reflect a knowledge other internet users may lack? Yes. See [the Swami Virato Web Page] http://newfrontier.com/nepal/swami1.htm # 5.2.0 If you practice tantra, how long have you been doing this? 53 years. Formally since 1980 =================================================== next survey begins From: nagasiva@luckymojo.com Revision Date: 49991028 ?What is Tantra? the term 'Tantra' is said to have many meanings, including 'weave' and 'continuum'. it may not be a religion, nor is it necessarily a yoga, though there are some who have understood it in this way. tantra is an APPROACH to a spiritual tradition. elaborated into systems of thought and behavior from nondualism, Buddhist Tantra places great emphasis upon Nagarjuna's School of Madhyamika, which posits that the goal (nirvana) and the problem (samsara) are the SAME. amongst some Hindu tantrics it is based on Shaktism's identity of Shiva and Shakti, the polar essentials of the cosmos. to the extent that Taoists identify Yin and Yang in Tao or Way, so it may be said to be a form of tantra. those who see Universe in terms of Jehovah and Satan and then IDENTIFY the two are Western, Christian tantrists. :> ?Does it have aspects in Buddhism, Hinduism and Taoism? no, it has MANIFESTATIONS in these religious traditions, but does not qualify as being ASPECTS of them. tantra is beyond religion. ?Are there Christian or other orthodox western equivalents? while I've never heard of a Christian who claimed that All is God and Satan conjoined and then identified them, I have been exploring what I consider to be Satanist tantra (which I call 'satantra'). this is based upon materialism and hedonism rather than asceticism and spiritualism on the one hand, practical analysis of scripture based on experiential and empirical reflection the recommended norm rather than the acceptance of legend as history. it arises out of the concepts/practices of the Platonists/Neo- platonists, the Pythagoreans, and the Gnostics. it is called Hermeticism and has manifestations in the form of quasi-masonic kinship organizations such as O.T.O. there is a direct association of O.T.O. with 'sex magick', most likely due to the antics of Aleister Crowley, who was one of its most influential members. tantra is often associated with those aspects of thought and behavior which are considered taboo in a society. sometimes the participants engage these behaviors directly, sometimes they do it symbolically. the goal, if any, is transcendance of socially-derived inhibitions (i.e. deprogramming). ?Is it a religion or simply a movement within religion? ?Is it separate from religion entirely? tantra is separate from religion entirely, depending, of course, on what one means by the terms: if Religion = 1) a social institution arising from esoteric mysticism tantra is not a social institution, though it has been associated with such things. some people think that it can be attached to particular traditions or practices. tantra is also a kind of context or current which resists being caged or packaged. but is Religion = 2) a path toward liberation? then tantra is not directed toward but IS liberation. religions sometimes inform the aspirant that one is in need and then prescribe a method to satisfy this need (remedy). in tantra one abandons the preliminary assumption that one is in need while identifying oneself with the divine and profane. if this requires rigourous ascetic practices, fine. if this includes debauching and self-destruction, fine. tantra does not 'get me liberated' or 'get me enlightened' or 'enable me to be saved'. it helps me understand that every remedy is available, that I am living in heaven, making a heaven or hell of wherever I am in the present moment. or if Religion = 3) a way of life then tantra qualifies. tantra and tao are equivalent if not identical in meaning here. ?Is it an attitude? to the extent that an attitude encompasses one's life and infuses it with ecstasy, so is it an attitude. it is not simply an 'intellectual attitude' or an 'emotional attidude'. this is why I say it is an APPROACH, rather than an attitude, though these may be related. ?What are its elements? ?What distinguishes Tantra from non-Tantra? since it is an approach, tantra does not have formal elements which can be said to comprise all of its manifestations. the more abstract, the more theoretical/pre-manifest/ideal, the more commonalities one finds. thus, while many tantric traditions postulate the universe in polar terms (polar, not dual), some may not. while some identify these polar entities in some direct or mystical way, some may not. many manifestations of tantra contrast the culture of the society in which they arise (setting the stage for deprogramming). in Indian and other societies this often equates to recommending controversial behavior like ritual sex, the ingestion of forbidden or disgusting materials (intoxicants or fecal matter, for example), incest or orgy, body modification and self-ornamentation (henna, tattoos, piercings, cuttings, scarification and self-mutilation) as part of one's practice. iconographric foci for tantrics often includes the unification of humans in sexual ecstasy. most older social traditions seem focussed on the pairing of 'opposite sexes' in their meditations, though some 'western tantrics' (cf. King; Crowley and the other spermognostics, for example) place a special emphasis on homosexual male 'rites', 'workings', 'operations', or whatever you would like to call them. non-tantra is that which separates the universe into duality. usually this involves seizing one half of the cosmic Two and basing one's thoughts/behaviors on it. thus, such cults as Pauline Christianity (which separates the world into 'Good' and 'Evil' or 'God' and 'Satan' or 'God' and 'Nature') are inherently non-tantric because they are non-resolvative. non-tantra is any approach which does not presuppose the spiritual value of all (a form of pantheism) and the living therein. thus, such cults as 'White Witchcraft' (which separates the world into the 'White' and 'Black', or 'Light' and 'Darkness') and would side with one, destroying the other, are inherently non-tantric. ?When did it start? ?Is it possible for it to die out? tantra started with shamanism (by whatever name) and in many other forms. it manifested in India, where it obtained its name, in Shaktic and Saivite forms. it has had countless false starts in many cultures, and has become corrupted into religion many times. IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR TANTRA TO DIE. tantra, is some ways, is life. if life dies it will renew by virtue of its nature. ?What are the essentials of its 'philosophy' if it has one? ?How does it relate to modern Eastern or Western philosophical models? tantra is less about 'views' and more about getting unstuck from views. Rajneesh and Nagarjuna have a lot to say about this. philosophy as a PRACTICE (i.e. Jacob Needleman's 'Question' or Zen's 'mondo') is tantric. philosophy as an archeology of deadwood concepts is not. the most tantric in Western philosophy (rather than poetry) I've seen is Hegel or Whitehead. Eastern philosophy has Nagarjuna, Ho Kung, and Chang Tao Ling. ?Does it have common elements in its practices? ?How do these relate to its philosophy? ritual sex and consumption of forbidden or noxious substances is a controversial element in some tantric rites, others may contain no transgressions at all. it is prone to variation based on culture and the individual in any tantric culture which might arise. and its particular social traditions focus upon consistent symbolism that are sometimes an identifying characteristic of the cult. the symbolism sometimes relates to philosophic 'opposites' (sex/religion, food/waste, male/female), which are united and enjoyed in practice. ?Is there an 'ideal' Tantra, regardless of how it manifests today? ?What is this like? 'ideal Tantra' must originate from and within each individual life. it is like reading this survey, but more complicated. haramullah ------------------===================------------------============= =================--------------------==================------------- copyright reverts to individual authors at publication, 1999. nagasiva@luckymojo.com (nagasiva) EOF