My contention is that Hindu 'Tantrism' probably originated during the
Gupta period (280 to 550 CE), or later, in India. The Tantras are
associated with 'medieval India,' having been written between 500 and
1800. Tantrism is not Vedic (1200 to 1500 BCE) or pre-Vedic, and did not
originate during the Iron Age. None of the Tantras seem to be pre-Vedic,
and in fact, are antagonistic to the Hindu Vedas.
Kashmir Shaivism, which predates Hindu Tantrism, arose during the eighth
or ninth century CE. In contrast, the Buddhist Tantric versions of the
'Prajnaparamita' date from around 500 CE, AFTER the Sutra Period in
India. So, the Buddhist Tantras came first, then Kashmere Tantras, and
then Hindu Tantras, as far as I can tell.
According to Bhattacharyya, "It is to be noticed that although later
Tantric writers wanted to base their doctrines on the Vedas, the
orthodox followers of the Vedic tradition invariably referred to Tantra
in a spirit of denunciation, stressing its anti-Vedic character."
Work cited:
'History of the Tantric Religion'
by N.N. Bhattacharyya
Manohar, 2007
On 12/10/2013 10:28 PM, Richard J. Williams wrote:
The word 'Tantra' in the phrase 'Vainashika-Tantra' still remains
undefined. What kind of 'Tantra' was Shankara referring to? A
textbook; an esoteric practice; a metaphysical notion; a medication, a
tool, or a magical siddhi? So, apparently Shankara got mixed up. He
wanted to discredit the Tantric Buddhists, but he was forced to adopt
the Buddhist Vajrayana notion of 'Consciousness Only. And why? Because
it is a logical hypothesis, based on tantric practice.
Notes:
The only texts that Shankara could have read on palm leaves would have
been the Buddhist sutras, which support the momentary theory. In fact,
before the invention of writing, all the tantric practices were
esoteric. So Shankara would hardly have known anything about 'Esoteric
Buddhism'. That is, unless Gaudapapda, Govindapada, and Shankara were
in fact, Tantric Buddhists themselves!
Not only did the Hindu Tantrics turn the feminine/male iconography
topsy-turvy, they didn't even realize that they were Buddhists.
Bhattachary gives an example of how mixed up the Tantric Hindus
apparently were. One of the chief tantric texts of the Hindus is the
'Mahanirvana' Tantra. The use of the term 'nirvana' indicates that
this tantra may have been used by the Buddhist tantrics.
So, Shankara called the Buddhists 'annihilationists'. But, the term
'nirvana' doesn't mean 'annihilation' - Nirvana means 'devoid of own
being', just like the Brahman absolute of Shankara. Go figure.
Works cited:
'History of the Tantric Religion'
A Historical, Ritualistic and Philosophical Study
By Narendra Nath Bhattacharyya
South Asia Books, 1982
p. 79, 84
'Central Philosophy of Buddhism'
By T.R.V. Murti
George Allen and Unwin, 1955
p. 152
On 12/10/2013 10:28 AM, Richard J. Williams wrote:
How convenient - Bill neglected to offer up a definition of
"tantrika". Apparently he doesn't want to talk about the elephant in
the room. According to New Wynn, MMY broke the sacred trust, the rule
that bonds guru and disciple. This then brings up the question of why
most of the respondents here do not see fit to defend the tantric
practices of their teacher, MMY. Read, Rick, Judy, Joe, and Vaj. Go
figure.
So, let's review what we know about "tantra".
The prefix "tan" in Sanskrit means "to elaborate" and "tra" which
means "a tool". So, tantra is a set of tools for the attainment of
self-realization. Tantra is whatever is used in the pursuit of the
attainment of spiritual reality, for example" mantra, yantra, puja,
pradakshina, etc. Tantra is thus a toolbox that provides the means
for spiritual practice.
So, tantra is called tantra because it elaborates on esoteric and
profound practices, especially relating to the principles of
spiritual realization (tattva) by the use of sacred mantras and
because it provides the tools for human liberation.
In fact, Rama was probably one of the most intelligent tantric
teachers that we know about, based on his education and on his
writings. Likewise, MMY was probably one of the most insightful
tantric teachers in the last 100 years. Go figure.
According to White, "Tantra is that Asian body of beliefs and
practices which, working from the principle that the universe we
experience is nothing other than the concrete manifestation of the
divine energy of the godhead that creates and maintains that
universe, seeks to ritually appropriate and channel that energy,
within the human microcosm, in creative and emancipatory ways."
So, who is a tantrika? So, it should be taken for granted that the
Zen Master Rama was a tantric practitioner and so was MMY. Based on
this definition, all TMers are tantrics, because they depend on the
use of secret mantras as tools for realizing an enlightened state.
Anyone that uses a systematic program of spiritual practice should be
called a "tantrika".
Works cited:
'Tantra in Practice'
by David Gordon White
Princeton University Press
p. 9
'Transcendent in America'
By Lola Williamson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tantra
