THE ARCANE ARCHIVE
	a cache of usenet and other text files pertaining to occult, mystical, and spiritual subjects.

To: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.magick.tantra,talk.religion.misc
From: nagasiva@luckymojo.com (nagasiva)
Subject: Survey Results on Tantra (LONG, many responses)

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! ;>

nagasiva@luckymojo.com (nagasiva)
----------------------------------------------------------- surveys begin

Tyagi 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: July 01, 1992

?What is Tantra?

The term 'Tantra' is said to have many meanings, including 'weave' and
'continuum'.  It is not a religion, nor is it a yoga, though there are
some who have understood it in this way.

Tantra is, more than anything else, an APPROACH.  From the basic 
assumption that All is One ('As above, so below') and One are All, 
it proceeds to become elaborated into systems of thought and 
behavior.  Thus, Buddhist Tantra is largely (philosophically) based 
upon Nagarjuna's School of Madhyamika, which posits that Nirvana 
and Samsara are the SAME.  In Hindu Tantra it is based on 
Shaktism's identity of Shiva and Shakti.  To the extent that 
Taoists identify Yin and Yang in Tao, so is it also a form of 
Tantra.

Those who see Universe in terms of God 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 Western Christian Tantra.

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 masonic kinship 
organizations such as O.T.O.

This is why there is such an association of O.T.O. with 'sex magick'.
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 social restrictions (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 term:

1) Religion = 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.  While I would not say that they are absolutely
wrong, I don't think that they are telling (or seeing?) the whole picture.

2) Religion = a path toward liberation

Tantra is not a PATH TOWARD liberation.  Tantra IS liberation.  In most
religions one is told that one is in need and then how a particular
tradition will satisfy this need (conveniently).  In Tantra one abandons
the preliminary assumption that one is in need, identifies oneself with
the divine (and also with the profane) and then lives life accordingly.

If this 'living life' includes rigourous ascetic practices, fine.  If 
this includes debauching and raping and pillaging, fine.  Tantra is not
about 'getting liberated' or 'getting enlightened' or 'being saved'.

It is about knowing that one is ALREADY saved and then living in heaven.

3) Religion = a way of life

Tantra is definitely a way of life.  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 most Tantric traditions postulate the universe in polar 
terms (polar, not dual), they then go on to identify these polar 
entities.

Most manifestations of Tantra also contrast the culture of the society in
which it arises (thus setting the stage for deprogramming).  In Indian
and other societies this often equates to recommending behavior such as 
ritual sex, the ingestion of forbidden or disgusting materials 
(intoxicants or fecal matter, for example), incest or orgy, and 
self-decoration (tattoos, piercings, paints, etc.) as part of one's 
'practice'.

Often iconographric foci for Tantrics includes the unification of humans
in sexual ecstasy.  I've seen many representations of heterosexual coitus
as religious statuary/painting, but am still looking for homosexual items
aside from those of the Greek.  Living Tantric traditions seem more 
focussed on the pairing of 'opposite sexes' in their meditations.  This 
makes some sense, yet has its limitations.  After all, if All is One, 
what does genitalia matter?

Non-Tantra is that which separates the universe into duality.  Usually
this involves the seizing of one half of this dualism and basing one's
thoughts/behaviors on it.  Thus, such cults as Paulist Christianity
(which separates the world into 'Good' and 'Evil' or 'God' and 'Satan'
or 'God' and 'Nature') are inherently non-Tantric.

Non-Tantra is any approach which does not presuppose the divinity 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') 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 also has elements in the Goddess traditions of times past, which
have been either Matricentric or a reaction to Patristic traditions.

As previously mentioned, it was manifested in Shaktism, has had countless
false starts in many cultures, and has devolved into religion many times.

Aleister Crowley is one of a few writers who has elements of his writings
which are Tantric, yet my understanding of his writings is yet incomplete.
Osho (Rajneesh) is the best popular writer I've found on the subject yet,
but his approach to the subject is, at times, pejorative and pedantic.

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?

Thou art God.  I am God.  All is God.   Let's play.

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 philosophic process or Zen's 'mondo')
is tantric.  Philosophy as an archeology of deadwood concepts is not.

The most tantric in Western philosophy I've seen is Hegel or Whitehead.
In Eastern is Nagarjuna or Ramakrishna.  I haven't read all of either
author, nor of either literary tradition, however, so take this into
consideration.

?Does it have common elements in its practices?
?How do these relate to its philosophy?

As was remarked above, ritual sex and consumption of forbidden or noxious
substances seems to be common.  These relate to its philosophy in that 
supposed 'opposites' (sex/religion, food/waste, male/female) are united 
and enjoyed.

?Is there an 'ideal' Tantra, regardless of how it manifests today?
?What is this like?

This is what I'm attempting to create.  So far I have seen no evidence of
this in our society.  I see that Western masonic organizations which do
not require that we 'do' anything to participate in them may have the
potential to become ideal forms, but I think 'ideal Tantra' must
originate from and within each individual life and suspect that 'organized
religion' is an oxy-moron.

Haramullah
=================================================== next survey begins

[tyagi] writes:
|930615 (about a year since last I posted these questions)

I wonder why you're posting them again.

|FOR ANYBODY WHO'D CARE TO POST A RESPONSE:

This is like a test at school ;-)
or "Write an essay on ... including in your essay the answers to ..."

|Questions on Tantra
|_____________________

The poster that gave a book reference was the most sensible.

|What is tantra?

I "think" tantra means thread or web.
It is a means for obtaining enlightenment.

|What are its elements?

Meditation practices including yoga, yantra, mantra.
Mostly practices that are like "a precious jewel" which should be 
kept locked tightly in a box.

The practices can be dangerous in the wrong hands.

|What distinguishes tantra from non-tantra?

I "think" focussing on the energy centres.

|Is tantra an attitude, a belief or practice?

Practice.

|Are there common elements in its practice, if it has any?

I think the movement of energy is the common element.
It is symbolised by the union of the male and female energies.
Shakti and Shiva, Lingam and Yoni.

|How do these relate to any common attitudes or beliefs?

male - female, yin - yang, left brain - right brain.

|Is it religion(s) or a movement within religion(s)?
|Is it separate from religion entirely?
|Can Tantra be found in Hinduism, Buddhism and Taoism?
|Are there Western equivalents?

In Hinduism and Mahayana Buddism.

|Where did Tantra start?

Ummmm. I suspect it is in the Vedas or at least some ancient Hindu texts.

|Is it possible for it to die out?

Anything is possible.

|Is there an 'ideal' Tantra, regardless how it manifests today?

I doubt it. Different things suit different people.
But I believe mantra is just one part of tantra and to practise it
without the other tantric practices is unwise.

|What are the essentials of 'tantric philosophy' if there is such a thing?

Blimey ! I think the union of male and female energy is its basis. But
it is a huge huge subject.

|How does this relate to modern Eastern or Western philosophical models?

Pass.

|_______________________________
|
|Tyagi the question-monger

-- 
Brunel University, Uxbridge, Middlesex, England.
janet: Linda.Birmingham@brunel.ac.uk
=================================================== next survey begins

[tyagi] wrote:
|FOR THE NEWSGROUP:
|
|What is Tantra?
|Does it have aspects in Buddhism, Hinduism and Taoism?
|Are there Christian or other orthodox western equivalents?
|
|Is it a religion or simply a movement within religion?
|Is it separate from religion entirely?
|Is it an attitude?

Yes ;-)

I will try to say something about Tantra - my outlook comes from having 
practiced yoga in the mid 70's in a group which saw its roots as being
in Tantra Yoga, and from having done some independent reading on the 
topic.

Tantra is an esoteric branch of both Buddhist and Hindu mysticism. 
Buddhist and Hindu Tantra have parallel but not identical symbolism, 
and both have similar practices allied to what we might call yoga.

Tantra refers variously to a body of scriptures, a view of the universe,
various teaching traditions and practices.

Many of the scriptures (Tantras) were translated to English by Sir John
Woodruff(?) writing as Arthur Avalon; a few of these translations are
available as Dover Book reprints.  A book I would strongly recommend
for those interested in the cultural context of Tantra is called
"The Art of Tantra".  Since much of the metaphysics of Tantra  
can be represented in symbolic or diagramatic form; understanding its
art helps convey the world view.

Tantra suffers from "bad press" -- some more justified than others --
some branches of Tantra talk about practices with unsavory overtones:
for example: meditating in graveyards or using human skulls, eating
meat, illicit sex. Discussion of these topics if complicated by the
fact that there are multiple interpretations of the esoteric symbolism
in the scriptures. These are sometimes refered to as the right hand,
middle, and left-handed paths - which vary from the most innocent 
symbolic interpretations to the most extreme and unconventional.  It 
is possible to view these paths as consistent but suited for different 
types or to repudiate one or another. Unconventional does not imply 
immoral, but tends to presume a more mystic approach with more inner 
guidance.

(I was in a group which was more or less in the middle on the average, 
but with some exceptions. It was sexually liberal for India but 
conservative for the US and promoted "family values" alongside the 
path of renuciation.)

The sexual aspect of Tantra got more press in the US -- for example 
there was a forgettable book entitled "Tantra: The Yoga of Sex" [by
Omar Garrison, I think -- tn] -- I can't speak for the sexual form 
of Tantra since I was not taught it and the second hand descriptions 
I have are a bit fragmentary.  There are some ideas from this that 
have entered American popular culture which pop up all over.

Another aspect of Tantra which seems to have been communicated is the
sense of intensity, of struggle. The process of Tantra yoga has been
likened to a fire burning away impurities. It is neither an easy path
nor a mass movement.

|What are its elements?

This is going to sound a lot like yoga -- I'm not sure I can say what
distingushes Yoga from Tantra, though there is a gradation of intensity.

The body/mind/soul of the individual reflects and is structured
like the universe.

The entire universe is in a cycle of movement from formless to manifest
to formless again. The development of human mind is part of that cycle
returning to the transcendent.

As you think so you become.

The manifest universe is vibrational in nature.

|What distinguishes Tantra from non-Tantra?

One essay on Tantra contrasted the Vedic and Tantric threads in Indian
culture - the Vedic emphasis being on ritual, caste and external 
religion - the Tantric emphasis being on yogic practice, indifference 
to caste and esoteric internal meaning.

|When did it start?

It's pretty hard to say. Many schools of Indian thought claim to have
older roots than can be justified my modern archiology (read Joseph 
Campbell for more on this.)  The same essay claimed Tantra had roots
prior to the Aryan invasion of India. There is evidence for some sort 
of yoga or shaminism going back a long way but what the idological 
framework of it was is hard to say. The scriptures themselves have 
relatively late dates.

|Is it possible for it to die out?

Sure, why not....

|What are the essentials of its 'philosophy' if it has one?

See the references and discussion above. I don't think I can 
communicate the essentials -- if I know them -- I can just point 
you in the general direction of a cluster of ideas and practices.

Hindu and Buddhist tantra have detailed cosmologies, but without
a connection to yogic practice they are just castles in the air.

Tantra has a specific place in the Hindu and Buddhist traditions; at
the same time it is possible to draw analogies with other mystical
traditions.  Like other Eastern cosmologies it has a sense of the 
size and age of the universe that is easier to put together with
modern science, (though the details are another question.)

Unlike some forms of christianity, the stress is on practice rather
than belief - on this basis Tantra claims to be emperical and 
self-demonstrating, though the esoteric teachings are passed on by 
authority more than public demonstration.

The subjective aspect - the layers of mind - can be related to 
psychology up to a point.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Your mileage may vary ;-) ;-) ;-)....

I don't claim to subscribe to or practice all the ideas above, I
am simply trying to sketch out the outlines of Tantra as I received 
them from various sources. Someone with different affinities in 
Eastern thought might take exception to the way this was presented.

(I am presently more inclined to see the divine in the world for its
own sake, than as an escape hatch to the transcendent. I'm more
neo-pagan and less yogic in my attitudes that I once was.)
-- 
 Albert Lunde         |Interfaith  |   *Y*Y*      "A branch on the
 Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu | Bisexual   |    *Y*        tree of life"
 alunde@nuacvm.bitnet | Feminist   |.......|.........................
=================================================== next survey begins


~Date: Wed, 16 Jun 93 14:04:58 -0700
~From: [Requested anonymity]
~To: [tyagi]
~Subject: Re: Tantra????

[tyagi:]
: 930615 (about a year since last I posted these questions)

I wasn't reading alt.magick then.

: FOR ANYBODY WHO'D CARE TO POST A RESPONSE:

: Questions on Tantra
: _____________________

: What is tantra?
:  ...

As a (poor) student and (sometimes) practicioner of Tantra, I have
some ideas, or at least some strong opinions.

** OPINIONS ON **

There are many paths of illumination.  Tantra is one of them.  It is
one which I have chosen to devote time to, because I find it the most
comfortable (most understandable, least bewildering, least 'arbitrary').

I will describe it in contrast to the Vedanta path, as I understand it.

I choose to practice yoga on my path, because of my own personal views.
I find the doctine of 'mind-only' almost incomprehensable.  I cannot
will myself into a state of meditation by sitting only.  I can reach a
state of physical centeredness via classical yoga poses, which then 
allows me to quiet my mind.  I don't know why, I just know what works.

Enough preamble...

Vedanta is the path of study.  Tantra is the path of action.  That is,
Vedanta says learn this, learn that.  In order to proceed on the path 
of illumination, Vedanta suggests adherence to a fairly strict set of
'rules.'  Tantra, on the other hand, says, try this, try that.  In order
to proceed on the path of illumination, Tantra suggests performing a
less strict set of practices, and contemplating the result.

It's like two sets of instructions for building a boat.  Vedanta 
describes what the boat should look like (maybe not just the finish, 
even at various steps along the way), but it doesn't say what to do.  
Tantra is a step by step set of what to do, but doesn't describe the 
boat.  Either set can be successfully followed.  I prefer the latter.

Lets try some questions from the audience:

Q.  Is Tantra a religion?

A.  No.  One could be a buddhist or hindu, or even athiest and practice
    Tantra.  Of course, some religions which like to enumerate a number
    of strict rules, might be uncomfortable with Tantra.

Q.  Is Tantra a yoga.

A.  Not exactly.  It is more like a yogic system.  If one follows the
    Tantric path, one is encouraged to practice many yogas (Hatha yoga,
    Kryia (sp?) yoga, Raga yoga, Karma yoga, Kundalini yoga, etc).  
    Many of these same yogas are also practiced in Vedanta.

Q.  You say you practice Tantra; what do you actually do?

A.  Mostly Hatha yoga, including the classical program, and some poses
    which I have been 'led' to practice.  Also various types of 
    meditation, depending on the situation.  Finally certain types of 
    'centering' practices in daily life (be aware of your whole body 
    as you walk down the street, be continuously aware of your speed 
    as you drive;  trite examples, but effective)  Even 
    brushing/flossing teeth, and neti become yogic 'exercises'.

I printed out your message to find some more questions...

Q.  What are it's elements?

A.  I'm doing this off the top of my head.  Get a good text.  I'd 
    recommend a text by Saraswati Janakananda.  I can't remember 
    the title.  I'll dig it up if you want.

Q.  What distinguishes Tantra from non-Tantra?

A.  See Tantra vs Vedanta, above.

Q.  Is tantra an attitude (No.), a belief (No.), or a practice?

A.  More like a coherent set of practices.  Tantra is a path of 
    illunination based on increasing awareness through the practice 
    of paying attention (concentration) to both your actions and 
    experiences.  There are a large number of practices (exercises, 
    activities, yogas, make up you own word) which Tantra recommends 
    to pursue this path.  Many are common to other paths.  There is 
    a slight attitude component to Tantra, in that it is more 
    experimental and experiential than most paths.

Q.  Why do people get excited and mention sex when they hear the 
    word Tantra.

A.  There are several factors, all of which are related to each other:
    1.  To "the social fabric" (both Eastern and Western), sex is a 
        strictly regulated activity.  There are only three 'valid' uses
        for sex:
        a.  Procreation (making babies)
        b.  Gratification (copulation, etc, for the fun of it)
        c.  Profit (prostitution)
        These are ranked from 'best' to 'worst', but all are socially
        acceptable.  Any other use of sex (if you can find one) is
        strictly taboo.  We'll come back to this thought.
    2.  Tantra, because of its experiential nature, treats sex just like
        any other human activity (can you say 'level playing field'?).
        When anked by the Tantric student "what is right/wrong about 
	sex", the 'master' says "try it, experience it, comtemplate it, 
	and decide...  and by the way, here are a set of instruction 
	to make you as aware of the experience as possible."  Remember, 
	Tantra is a 'how-to-' manual, not a set of rules.
    3.  Back to the social fabric.  Now, to suggest suggest that communion
        with the godhead can be achieved through the practice of sex is
        not just taboo, it is social and religious heresy.  People are 
        either repulsed, or fascinated, or both.  But it does get their
        attention.

End of questions.

Almost.

I want to get back to one point... 

Q.  What is the connection between Tantra and attitude?

A.  Tantra is a remarkably attitude (judgment) free system of practices.
    For that reason, 'belief systems' that require certain attitudes to
    be either present or absent denounce Tantra as inferior.  Tantra is
    not an attitude, but many social apologists will describe it 
    negatively because of their attitudes.

**  OPINIONS OFF **

I said that I am a (sometimes) practicioner.  I am not a 'pure 
Tantrist.'

I pursue illunination via awareness through the practice of yoga.
I also pursue illumination via will through the practice of dreaming.

I am not particularly dedicated to/good at either.  I am familiar with 
both.
=================================================== next survey begins

[tyagi] writes:
|What is Tantra?
|Does it have aspects in Buddhism, Hinduism and Taoism?
|Are there Christian or other orthodox western equivalents?

[stuff deleted]

|What are the essentials of its 'philosophy' if it has one?
|How does it relate to modern Eastern or Western philosophical models?
|
|Does it have common elements in its practices?
|How do these relate to its philosophy?
|
|Is there an 'ideal' Tantra, regardless of how it manifests today?
|What is this like?

Tantra is generally associated with the mystical practice of sex, but this 
does a disservice to tantric thought.  The basis of tantric religious 
practice, whether under buddism or hinduism, is a rejection of the idea 
that physical existence is something to be overcome.  The tantric 
believes that physical experience is not just a cosmic oversight, but is 
in fact the path to spiritual awareness.  The tantric therefore 
embrasses intense physical experiences, such as sex, pain, taste, smell, 
or exhaustion.  While many practitioners of yoga are working toward 
overcoming the maya, or veil of seperate physical existence, those who 
embrassed tantric thought became interested in finding the physical 
paths to higher consciousness.  Thus tantric yoga consists largely of 
sexual/spiritual practices.  Because many cultures are uncomfortable 
with sex, particularly ours, this aspect of tantric practice has 
captured all the headlines, and leads to a perception that tantra is 
little more than an extension of the Kamma Sutra.

As to the question of western alternatives, I think Mathew Fox's call 
for Catholic participation in native spiritual experience follows 
similar lines. Like the tantrics, he is opposing a view of physical 
existence which says the goal is to get beyond it and reach a 
satisfactory afterlife.  He calls for more experience in this life, 
and in particular he appeals to people to experience the sacred in 
nature and human experience.  Feel free to flame me for making this 
stretch in comparing two very different belief systems, I have thick 
skin, and my wife still thinks I'm great, no matter what you think. ;)

=================================================== next survey begins

~From: philip@netcom.com (Phil Stephens)
~Subject: Re: Tantra Questions
To: spirit@blowfish.taligent.com
~Date: Wed, 16 Jun 93 0:42:45 PDT

Tyagi:
|930615 (about a year since last I posted these questions)

I could wait until someone more qualified responds, but I guess I'm not
*that* unqualified.  Bear in mind that my information is mostly second
hand, ie from books.

|FOR ANYBODY WHO'D CARE TO POST A RESPONSE:
|
|Questions on Tantra
|_____________________
|
|What is tantra?

'Round herebouts, (Californica), it seems to refer to New Age Sex.
Originally it referred to a rather broad catagory of "left hand path"
religious sects and approaches within Hinduism and Buddhism.  Or so my
books tell me.  I have a number of books about Tantra, including at
least one with hardly any sexual stuff at all but a lot of historical
information.  One of my favorite books has lots of practical stuff
about yoga and diet and meditation, and one whole chapter on sex.
Other books concentrate on how to do the sexual part, and give only
passing mention to the historical roots.  Then again, another favorite
of mine is _Masturbation,_Tantra_and_Self_Love_ by Margo Woods (oops,
can't find that book right now to check that I have title and author
correct), in which she speaks from her own experience and encourages
ignoring the text books.

| What are its elements?
| What distinguishes tantra from non-tantra?

Depends.  Which tantra?
 
|Is tantra an attitude, a belief or practice?

Yes.  Examples can be found for each or all.

| Are there common elements in its practice, if it has any?
| How do these relate to any common attitudes or beliefs?

I have insufficient data.  I know books better than practicioners.
 
|Is it religion(s) or a movement within religion(s)?
| Is it separate from religion entirely?
| Can Tantra be found in Hinduism, Buddhism and Taoism?
| Are there Western equivalents?

I guess all of these depend on to whom you talk... historically, the
word was used w/i those religions.  But the word is currently being
used in other contexts that are not religious and not neccessarily
spiritual, such as for very languid extended non-goal-oriented sexual
sensuality.  Most often when I have heard the word used it is for
sexual activity with a focus on spiritual awareness, spiritual oneness,
or tripping out (nirvhana).

|Where did Tantra start?
| Is it possible for it to die out?
| Is there an 'ideal' Tantra, regardless how it manifests today?

Well, some folks claim it predates all other religions by tens or
hundreds of thousands of years.  I have no opinion on that, simply
unresolvable.  The other two questions depend on which definition you
are using.  I very concept of "ideal" would be antithetical to some
forms, and quite central to others.

|What are the essentials of 'tantric philosophy' if there is such a thing?
|How does this relate to modern Eastern or Western philosophical models?

Guess it depends on who you ask.  I would rather know what you want
from tantra, so that I would have some idea of which sources (textual
and human) to recommend.

For my own part, I have recently expressed my interest in terms of
seeking an altered state of consciousness that is both intesnsely
spiritual and intensely sexual.  My religious/spiritual values (more or
less neo-pagan) are implicite in a way, but that is background or
foundation rather than objective.  The various descriptions of
"tantric" sexual technique are *to me* possible means to an end, where
that end is a state of mind, and experience, that transcends ordinary
sex while being also very well integrated into the physical act.

Aside: my personal view of tantra, now that I'm getting into that
subject instead of answering questions about tantra in general, is that
you can drop much of the traditional ritual, and especially that you
can drop all of the traditional dogma about genders and yin/yang and
what exactly the energy is doing.  Not that all of the tradition is
pointless or wrong, but that if you happen to have a partner of the
same gender, no problem; if you don't believe in kundalini energy, no
problem; if you can't hold some particular posture for long periods of
time and or can't maintain an erection while doing what some particular
source suggests, no problem.  In Pagan/Wiccan terms, the point is the
raising of energy, not the satisfaction of detailed traditional
scripting.

Hope I'm making sense.  I don't have time to proofread and condense
this as much as I would like.

|_______________________________
|
|Tyagi the question-monger

        Bounder,   aka Sharihatsu (Japanese pronunciation for Gautama
                        Buddha's most intellectual disciple, reputedly
                        last to attain enlightenment.)
=================================================== 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 (nagasiva)
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
EOF