Talk:Tantra/Archive 1

Tantra FAQ and other untitled comments

Is the FAQ released under a compatible license with Wikipedia?

No - see [1]. "reproduction for profit or for non-electronic distribution prohibited without the express permission of the copyright holders."

Questions about tantra. Add your quistions and we will try to answer them in the article.

How do you learn to feel your spritual energies ?

Where/how can your find people who pratise tantra ?

What is the names of the tantra vedas. And what year are they from ?

Is there a good reason for writing the adjective as "tantrik" in this article and not "tantric"? Google suggests that the latter is much more common. Searches for the former spelling lead to an American phallic cult that does not seem to be representative of the main body of knowledge.

Solri 08:45 Jul 25, 2002 (PDT) I've changed to "tantric", though both spellings are common. If anything, I prefer "tantric" since it makes it obvious that we're dealing with an English adjective derived from the Sanskrit, not an actual Sanskrit word. I've revised the article extensively - I hope I haven't been too brutal.

Anonymous User : I am a new Wikipedia user. Since the Tantras are all Hindu shastras that are self-proclaimed followers of the Vedas, I have edited some of the page, including a reference by Woodroffe. It is obvious that whoever wrote this is much more aware of the Tantric offshoot known as Vajrayana Buddhism. IF you wish to give an accurate description of Tantra, than describing Yoga (foundationally a Hindu concept) and Tantra (the post-Vedic, nondualist (advaitin) Hindu yogins and Shiva-Shakti bhaktas) as they exist, and then giving a separate section on Vajrayana Buddhism, would be more accurate. For remember, it is entirely a Hindu concept that Shiva and Shakti are the dual, manifest principles of Para Shiva, while Vajrayana cleaves along different lines. In spite of Mahayana Buddhism artificial creation of 'wisdom beings' that are actually so many Hindu gods and goddesses, like Ma Tara (said to be another form of Ma Kali in the Chandi Path and the older Puranas), the Tantras of the Abhinava Gupta and other schools represent Shiva-Shakti worshippers, who are clearly Hindu and not Buddhist. So representing the bifurcated nature of Hindu and Buddhist schools, and then perhaps for the sake of Western readers, referring to the ridiculous 'American' schools, this article achieves better coherence.

In general, I do not disagree with the most of this - though the Tantras are all Hindu shastras - is factually inaccurate, and far too a broad generalisation. There are plenty of tantras which are not Hindu shastras at all. Take for example the Kalachakra, Guhyasamaja, Yamantaka, and even Heruka Chakrasamvara and Hevajra tantras; there are hundreds, if not thousands, more examples. The root tantras of e.g. Guhyasamaja -even according to modern scholars- go back to the early 5th to 7th century CE, whereas most Hindu tantric shastras are dated around the 11th - 13th century CE by most modern scholars. The Buddhist/Hindu origins debate will continue for a long time no doubt. Regarding WP, I consider the best option is to disambiguate the term. For, despite the best intentions of many practitioners and scholars, "Tantra" still means kinky Indian sex for most people. (20040302)

I find this quite funny: "According to John Woodroffe, the foremost scholar on Tantra". Sir John may have been one of the first Western scholars to be really interested and translated tantric texts, but the foremost of all - no. The foremost scholars of tantra have been and will be found in the traditional schools of tantra.

This article should discuss different schools of tantra: Kaula, Mishra and Samaya. There is very good article on topic of tantra by Swami Jnaneshvara (disciple of Swami Rama Tirtha) http://www.swamij.com/tantra.htm Also http://www.realization.org/page/doc0/doc0050.htm reflects some light on the topic. --Arjuna 04:41, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Removed Link To Tantra.com

Tantra.com is a neotantra sex website, and more to the point it is a commercial website- who the hell is putting it up here? I think I removed it once before.... Advertising is NOT allowed. ThanksShiva bakta 08:12, 4 July 2006 (UTC)Shiva_bakta

Section on Kundalini added

Added some text on Kundalini, and how it relates to Hinudism, esp Theory of Karma. Are any sections too confusing-pls let me know. I have also added a section on Left/Right Handed path, based on my own personal knowledge and experience.

Some people might say why include Kundalini at all, as it is such a secertive field. But I disagre. Many New Agers and so called Neo Tantriks have spread a lot of bullshit. Kundalini is now just a way of sex enjoyment, or method of getting supernatural powers. Its original purpose, Nirvana or Moksha, has been lost. This leads to a lot of superstistion like a certain Lady in India who claims to open Kundalini in few hours! The reader has to be very careful about being ripped off, and so any information is good. Shiva bakta 09:08, 4 July 2006 (UTC)Shiva_bakta

I went ahead and removed this section. See kundalini. The article on kundalini might be a better place for this material.TheRingess 01:04, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Updates section on Vedas

The previous section on Hindu Tantra said stuff like "Vedic rituals and Tantra are different". I have rewritten the section to show why they are not, giving references from books that are easily available in the West. I also added a section to show why Hindu tantra discourages free sex. It is based entirely on my knowledge of Ayurveda and Yoga. Do my Buddhist friends agree with me- what is your philosophy? user:Shiva_bakta

I agree with your point, but have deleted the reference to aurobindo and changed the accusatory tone of the paragraph. I also made the section more objective and less opinionated. - supernaut76

Like to see two sections on this topic Hindu - Buddhist.

Hello! I would like to see this section on "Tantra" to be broken down into two sections! Hindu and Buddhist as there are diffenrences between them and as they belong to different religions. --Mitrapa 02:09, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)Mitrapa

I agree. Although there is some cultural cross-over, and certain Tantras are shared by both Buddhism and Hinduism, modern traditions differ wildy in interpretation and praxis. (20040302 09:32, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC))

==> I have put a section on the similarities between Tantra. The differences are merely in the Religious Dogma- What Hindus call Shiva, Buddhits call Buddha, and the Shaktas call Mother. Shiva bakta 08:20, 5 July 2006 (UTC)Shiva_bakta

Tantra classification

There are three types of Tantric Sex: White, Gray, and Black. White Tantra never ejaculates nor reaches orgasm in order to awaken consciousness. Gray Tantra elongates the sexual act, and sometimes concludes with orgasm/ejaculation, but without any longing towards awakening consciousness. Black Tantra always concludes with orgasm/ejaculation in order to awaken consciousness. It is said that White Tantra awakens consciousness to the absence of desire, while Black Tantra awakens consciousness into desire.

I am fairly well read on the topic of tantra and I have never seen this classification system. Is this from some neo-tantric writings? I'm pretty sure it is not a traditional classification scheme, and as such, needs to include some information about where this system is derived from or described. What is the source of these assertions? — Adityanath 15:41, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

Seems a bit bogus to me. In my experience, "White/Black/Grey" are Western magical catagories. If you google "Tantra white black grey" stuff comes up, but it mostly seems to be Western appropriations of tantra...they equate tantra with alchemy. It doesn't match anything I've read about Hindu or Buddhist tantras. Perhaps there is a correlation with the triad relating to the three gunas, but then it should be White/Red/Black. I suspect that that paragraph would be better put under the New Age section unless you want to do a scholarly reconstruction of whatever truth might be hidden in the paragraph. Good luck; I'll be curious what you turn up. Emyth 21:05, May 1, 2005 (UTC)

Grey is not a seminally important colour in any traditional tantric tradition. It exists, (often representing ash), but (as Emyth states) on the occasions where one would use a triple classification, red is used alongside white and (black or dark blue). Moreover the classification of tantra according to ejaculation seems very dubious.

White/Black ARE used to distinguish magical activities - but they do not form a primary dichotomy as found in spheres of culture (eg Ibrahimic faith cultures, and therefore hollywood, harry potter, etc.) deeply influenced by the eternal battle between Spenta Mainyu / Angra Mainyu of Zoroastrianism (aka God and the Devil). Modes of activity are more often divided into the four: peace, increase, power, and wrath, which if coloured would be something like white, yellow, red and black. Most 'white' magic from the western traditions (e.g. love potions) are not considered white at all in the asian systems - more generally they would be considered red (and rather dark). (20040302)

Sex is just sex and I do not think there are any white grey black or any color tantra sex. Tantra in my understanding is a philosophy, that uses energries to reach a state of mind which in pure and non dual. Correct me it I am wrong.(jagan@wlink.com.np)

Translator

I suspect the Mike Magee linked to in the article is a different Mike Magee to the one that translated this passage (if it isn't Sri Lokanath Maharaj as one website claims). But if anyone knows better please delete this comment. Shantavira 18:16, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

No, that is the right Mike Magee, for some period of time known as Lokanath. For more info on Mike and his relationship with Shri Gurudev Mahendranath, see Occult History of the Nath Order 1984-2003. Adityanath 04:26, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Plagarism

80.231.218.11 added a large section that was copied from http://sivasakti.com/articles/tantra/art25.html. I have removed this section, if anyone feels that this added useful content, pls let me know, we can work out some new text. S.N. Hillbrand 18:10, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

217.212.20.126 Added a bunch of stuff that seems off, not my article, thought I'd edit to let ya know something funny happened. kodemage--24.14.228.236 06:23, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

That was inside of 80.231.218.11's plagarism and was already removed. What is your NPOV complaint?

Intro Translation

By my Monier-Williams sanskrit dictionary, tantra does not mean 'to weave.' I checked Apte as well, just to make certain but it definitely has a primary translation of 'loom'. However, there is a good argument to be made that the primary tranlation is not the acurrate on in this regard, but rather than tantra actually refers to the uninterrupted vertical thread of a loom; symbolizing a continuous teaching.

Puzzled

Have never, ever posted to Wikipedia, so be gentle.  :-) Not even sure how I got here, or whether I can get back again.

Am trying to research alternatives to traditional western relationships and sexuality and finding some information Extremely difficult to come by. Of the literally Thousands of "Tantra" websites that I've found, None have been able to answer my questions; How popular is Tantra in the US? How many people (approximately) practice Tantra? How many people in the US purchase Tantric centered books or magazines, or attend workshops? Can anyone point me in the right direction? I'm trying to get a feel for the demographics and popularity of Tantrik practice in general (regardless of the specific school) in the US.

No, this isn't for any sort of news thing. It's a personal project and something that I've been working on for about 3yrs.

Link Apology

To people watching this page, I apologize for removing so many links. For some reason, this page seems to attract anonymous posters posting pseudo-spiritual or commercial links. Maybe this is just the nature of the topic. If anyone believes that a link I have removed has informative value to readers of this page, please leave a note in the talk when you post it (or in the post comment) and I'll discuss its contents with you before doing anything. I definitely do not want to discourage additional information (anonymous or otherwise) but I'd like to keep the page informative vice apologetic. S.N. Hillbrand 01:35, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Neo Tantra and Tantramassage

Dear Hillbrand, sorry that I did my changes as an anonymous - my German login didn't work on the English wikipedia for some reason, so I created a new login to react to your text above. I did the text about Tantramassage as a part of Neo Tantra. Tantramassage is a quite big movement in Europe, specially in Germany where it started. My English is not perfect, so there might be some mistakes in the way I put it into words - but i really think there is additional information in my text. www.tantramassage is the site with most information in English about the topic, it is a company's website - don't know how strict you want to deal with links to companys. EarthWater 18:04, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi EarthWater- Thank you for contributing to this article. You bring up an important point, namely how should we deal with topics tangentially related to the article? I think that the time may have come to move the neotantra section to its own article (similar to how de.wikipedia.org is divided). This would allow for more of these sorts of postings without diluting the main article. What do you think? S.N. Hillbrand 04:38, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm all for separating these two artciles. Csbodine 20:30, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Dear Hillbrand, dear Csbondine, I appreciate your attention on the topic - still I really would prefer the topic to stay in the main tantra article, as it gives an answer to how to practice tantric ideas (or at least they are inspired by tantra). The Neo tantra article in German is quite new and focusses mainly on the Scene of tantra workshops / seminars. Anyway I know that dealing with tantra in practice (not only theory) brings up discussion because of its sexual nature, it would not be honest to keep this part out of the articel. EarthWater 22:20, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

EarthWater, I appreciate your input, however please read Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not. We do not provide how-tos. I've created the Neotantra article and provided users with a link if they wish to learn more. Please place all further new age material in this article. S.N. Hillbrand 01:55, 20 January 2006 (UTC).

Dear Hillbrand,

I do not agree to the move. Tantra is in general a sex related topic, it was sex relatet for several thousands of years - not only in theory. I read Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not and do not see that it explains your changes. This Article is about tantra with all its aspects, just because YOU don't like a certain aspect it doesn't mean that you give it an other name and put it away. Neotantra is a word that came up very recently - who made it up? is it relevant enough to be an articel on its own ?? Is it the right word to describe the active Tantra szene in the English speaking parts of the world ? EarthWater 16:17, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Earthwater, no one disputes the integral role that sex plays in tantra. That is explicit in the article. I believe that the various "new-age" incarnations of revered sexuality are sufficiently significant and distinct in their own right to deserve a separate article. The reference to Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not does not speak to spliting the articles, rather I referenced it to point out that "how to practice tantric ideas" is not a valid topic for an encyclopedia article. On the other hand, descriptions of how various sects do practice tantra (comparative sociology, if you will) are perfectly appropriate.

Just as the articles on Buddhism or Christianity can not possibly hope to cover all forms of either of those practices, this article cannot adequately cover all topics to which people assign the name tantra. Providing proper places and links to information is how Wikipedia expands. If you do not like the name Neotantra, you should feel free to rename the article. Perhaps New Age Tantra or Non-dogmatic tantra would be appropriate. We can update the links on this site at that time as well. S.N. Hillbrand 19:55, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

I am just discovering this Wikipedia article on Tantrism. I am also very reluctant to the "new age" quotation about Tantrism in the beginning. And I agree that a term such as "Neo Tantrism" would be much more accurate when referring to the appropriation of Tantric doctrines by new age. Just look at what J. Woodroffe (alias A. Avalon) has written on a similar subject in the introduction of his book: The Serpent Power; there J. Woodroffe dismisses all the misunderstandings and false interpretations of Tantric doctrines by thesophists. I guess it applies to new age as well. TwoHorned

Add Wiki-link to White Tantrism stub?

Just wanting to suggest the idea of adding a link somewhere in the article to the wikipedia stub on "White Tantrism". Perhaps under the "See Also" section as being a link under a heading of Gnostic Tantra or Gnosis Tantra or Tantra in Gnosticism? In gnosis it is also refered to as Alchemy so perhaps link somewhere to the Alchemy article would be appropriate and vice versa?

David 19/01/06

---

Hi David, thanks for the suggestion, however the issue of White Tantrism was discussed earlier (see above) and decided that it was a western formalism. A good place to put it would be in the Neotantra article. Thanks! S.N. Hillbrand 02:11, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

unusual sex acts

What I know about tantra is entirely in regards to extremely unusual sex practices, from sex for hours without climax, to sex among corpses guided by an assumably crazed guru. Orthadox hindu's (in my experience) regard it as witchery designed to provide unnatural powers to the practicioner based upon his desires, rather than thru enlightenment and renunciation to God's will. The fact that it has caught on in western pop-culture in no way reduces the signifigance of the obvious criticisms. I am no expert regarding tantra, and have no ready citations available, but instead I speak only from what I know on the subject. It is my opinion that the article could do with a greater degree of scrutiny and explanation of critical views regarding this highly unusual method. Sam Spade 11:48, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I am curious if, as a new reader, you found particular sections difficult to digest? Is the verbiage too dense or perhaps the organization lacking? It would be difficult to refute each scurrilous attack leveled by non-practicians who compete for the same body of laiety, for the simple reason that they are too numerous. Second, given that Tantra originated around the 5th or 6th century (see 'Religious Traditions of Asia' by Joseph Kitagawa to source this), any critique or scrutiny could only address a hopelessly small segment of its total practicing body. Thus, you can always find outliers but no one insists that a critique of David Koresh be inserted into the Christianity article. S.N. Hillbrand 00:27, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Sam, it sounds like what you know is based on hearsay and misinterpretation, rather than any specific training or reading. (I mean no disrespect, just an observation). As a practioner of Tibetan Buddhism, I have never had unusal sex with anyone under the banner of Tantric practice. (What I do in my own personal life will remain personal. lol) That said, there are visualizations of dieties in charnel grounds performed in wrathful practices and visualizations of deities in Yab Yum. It wouldn't be surprising Orthadox Hindus would deride Tantric practices if it isn't a part of their everyday practices, much like there are topics that Conservative Christians and Jews would disagree on. My understanding and experience with Tantra is that it is a very direct manipulation of energies (prana? qi?) through enlightened visualizations. Of course, I'm not an expert on the subject, but I do practice it. Csbodine 07:33, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

I think you both make good points, I admit my ignorance and tertiary sources, and mean no offense. That said, I do think a more detailed discussion of criticism and the responses to it is necessary. Sam Spade 12:47, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Another problem is the rise of Neotantra and other Western forms of tantra which almost exclusively equate tantra and sex. I, like you, used to equate tantra almost exclusively with Sex magic. While physical sex can be used in tantric practices, anyone who says that it must include sex is either clueless or being manipulative as such a statement goes against some of the foundations of Tantric practice (at least in Tibetan Buddhism). Csbodine 17:18, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

This passage seems judgemental and POV. Could someone who knows about tantra neutralise it?

Traditional Tantrists say their practice involves much more than mere wizardry or sexual titillation: like the rest of Yoga (Hindu), it requires self-analysis and the conquest of material ignorance, often through the body, but always through a pure outlook of the mind. 'Real Tantra' is about transforming one's sexual energy into spiritual progress, and has nothing to do with 'sex just for fun'. Those without a guru or lacking in discipline of the mind and body are unfit. It is telling that a Tantrica in West Bengal, a devotee of the Hindu goddess Kali, once said that "those most fit for Tantra almost never take it up, and those least fit pursue it with zeal."

--Hugh7 05:41, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

"Black magic"

There's a minor comment in the article about how "Indian journalism" portrays Tantrism as "black magic" but with cases like these: [2] maybe there's a reason for that and it should be expanded. -- Antaeus Feldspar 16:08, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Islam and tantra

In the first paragraph of the article the author referred to some form of tantra being practiced by South-Asian muslims, but no citation is provided, can we get more details on this? Sufitul 3:12, 14 April (UTC)

This may not answer your question exactly, but in the classical book of J. Woodroffe, " The Serpent Power", there is a mention of the use of Tantric doctrines by certain branches of Sufism in India. A very interesting subject in itself, by the way. TwoHorned

The 5 Ms

I would like to suggest a link to the separate 5 Ms page for a further in detail analysis of the meaning of 5 Ms. The theory of Shrii Shrii Anandamurti on the subject is covered there, but more interpretations should be added. cJ --Cracker jack 14:34, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Neutrality

It seems to me that this article is no longer neutral. Several sections list no references and seem to me to be written in the style of essays. The factual accuracy of some of the statements made seem hard to verify. TheRingess 00:55, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

==> Which sections? Who gave you policing power?

TheRingess- Please be a little more community-oriented with your edits. Many people have put work into this page and would like to see it improved. However, Slash and Burn approaches are typically not useful. Let's start with the section you find the most NPOV and work on it. Which one would you like to start with? S.N. Hillbrand 02:13, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Removed section on free sex

Even though this section cited some of its sources, this section read too much like a personal essay. Even the title is suggestive of an essay. If reinstated, I suggest shortening, a different title, footnotes and a neutral tone. TheRingess 01:07, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Right Hand and Left Hand paths section

Ditto for this section. Upon reading it there were too few sources and it read too much like an essay. TheRingess 01:10, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

==>You have removed a lot of other sections, like link between Vedas and Tantra, link b/w Hindu and Buddhist Tantra, even these 2 topics had enough sources. It seems just are biased against Hindus in general, since you have only edited those parts that relate to Hindus. May I ask the reason why? Or forget it- I dont have time for a battle.

Neutrality? Or White Mans Burden?

TheRingess has deleted more than 50% of the article, including portions that have existed for a long time. She has even deleted portions that had references(as mentioned above). Why? Does this qualify as vandalism? I might question why a Westerner would edit and delete portions of a chapter on Hinduisim. Well, thats ok. This is a White mans club, and anything that doesnt agree with White Mans version has to go.

No probs. I am leaving this place- I have been told several times that this is a Western club, and if we like our own view, we should create our own club(these were the exact words, I am not exaggerating). I think I will finally do this.

TheRingess, you can revert the article back to the way it was originally, written by your White friends. Good bye, you wont be hearing from me again. Shiva bakta 14:02, 12 July 2006 (UTC)Shiva_bakta

Yes, but since it has been reverted by someone else, this is moot. However, the whole article is completely uncited. This leaves it open to any editor to simply remove content. Proper citation of academic references will prevent this. This is not a place to expound one's personal thoughts and feelings on Tantra, but rather a place to objectively report on what other reputable sources have said. —Hanuman Das 23:35, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Tantric Sex

Agree with Ringness, but also though that Shiva_bhakta made a crucial point. I have completely rewritten the section for a more NPOV. Will append my references shortly. This is probably white mans burden, but then we do have a specific mandate and there are always the links for more subjective POV's. The actual practise of tantra should not be carried out by reading an encyclopedia anyways! --Supernaut76 23:25, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

CItations

The tags in the article are there because the sections are not properly cited. WP policies change. It is now no longer sufficient to simply list your reference at the end and be done with it. You have to cite your sources inline in the article, see WP:CITE. —Hanuman Das 00:19, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Plagiarism

The following three sentences were copied word for word from David Gordon White's Introduction to Tantra in Practice. This is not acceptable. —Hanuman Das 00:33, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

• Tantra has persisted and often thrived throughout Asian history. Its practitioners have lived in India, China, Japan, Tibet, Nepal, Bhutan, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Korea, Cambodia, Burma, Indonesia and Mongolia. No form of medieval Hinduism, Buddhism, or Jainism has been without a Tantric component.

An apology

I was too hasty and too bold with my previous edits. I will endeavour to be contribute positively to this article.TheRingess 02:47, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Tantra and the Vedas

This section, to me, reads like an essay. It seems to me to be original research. This sentence in particular:

"Thus tantric concepts are exquisitely mirrored in the more exoteric terms and stories, hidden to the uninitiated or unwary..."

seems to be very pov. I think someone could rewrite the section to be more encyclopedic in tone (less conclusions, more point by point examples and comparison). I don't think that's me, though. If no one is interested in rewriting it, then I think it should be deleted.TheRingess 02:52, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Agreed that I need to work on the wording to make it more neutral. However I think deleting it would be overly harsh. This POV is a essentially Tantric and I believe that it is important that it be communicated in some form ( but perhaps not as I have worded it). --Supernaut76 08:53, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't mean to sound harsh. I agree that a section that relates tantra to the vedas is very important.TheRingess 09:15, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Neotantra

I've been looking through the recent changes and there is a lot of editing going on related to Neotantra and Neotantrics. Since there is an article on Neotantra, shouldn't most of this be moved there with only a one or two paragraph mention here? -999 (Talk) 16:26, 19 July 2006 (UTC)