Shaivism and the Yoni Tantra

[srivijaya]

To srivijaya:

To come to the topic whether the Yoni Tantra is to be taken literally the answer is: yes, but there are of course also grosser substitutes allowed, like using a painted or engraved yantra (or in Vajrayana a mandala) instead of the Yoni, or a murti of the devi, or a vessel or flask filled with alcohol or water, instead of a living female, but this substitute procedure is not described in the Yoni Tantra.

Dear MahaHrada,
Many thanks for your information regarding this tantra. Following on from this, I have a general question which I would like to ask. In doing so, I am not implying that any person here either advocates or censures what I will write, or that any view has anything to do with them. It's just an open question, in order to better understand the issue.

In such tantric rites as these we see the actual transgressive acts advocated. Yet, in one point I see a paradox which I find hard to overcome. Whilst one can imagine consumption of alcohol, meat and so forth as having only a temporary effect on the body, I cannot envisage the same for loss of semen as it is said to exist as a subtle force throughout the body and that this seminal energy is the Atman.

How would a yoni tantrik reconcile this dilemma?

Namaste

[MahaHrada]

Namaste

Sexual fluid is not representing the Atman, but it is considered to be connected to the basic life force virya, therefore it is said that the sexual fluid and the sexual energy and its direction of flow, upward or downward, is related to conciousness.

While the downward flow is generally connected with worldly life and procreation the upward flow with spiritual achivements, in tantra nonetheless sexual fluids need to be emitted.

This as you correctly remark, results in contradictions and we are left in doubt about the diverse methods and ways how to direct and use sexual energy in our life.

But this problem does not especially apply to the Yoni Tantra or Hindu Tantras or Hatha Yoga but also to the buddhist Vajrayana, which you study. Especially the Chakrasamwara tantra, which you follow, does not care about retention, but emphasizes the emisson of fluids. The Chandamaharocana, Hevajra and other important Vajrayana tantras do also allow and even recommend emisson.

Among the buddhist tantras i am only aware of one, the Kalachakra, that has an emphasis on retention and accumulation of body fluids because, contrary to other tantras, the bindus are stacked on top of each other in the median channel.

I would like to add some quotes from the original Vajrayana source tantras and commentaries but due to the explicit language this is not possible in a public forum.

Anyways,... i don´t remember to have ever heard or read any comments of teachers of any tradition that tries to explain this contradiction in a way that was convincing enough for me to pass it on to you.

[srivijaya]

But this problem does not especially apply to the Yoni Tantra or Hindu Tantras or Hatha Yoga but also to the buddhist Vajrayana, which you study. Especially the Chakrasamwara tantra, which you follow, does not care about retention, but emphasizes the emisson of fluids.

Dear MahaHrada,
This is correct, although at some point during the historical development (perhaps the transfer to Tibet?) the emphasis changed to one of retention. It may also have something to do with the adoption of tantra into a monastic setting but no Tibetan Lamas I have met have ever advocated emission, though like you rightly say, there are such instructions in the source texts.

It remains a paradox.

Namaste

[MahaHrada]

Yes they do not recommend it openly, but you will never know what they practice since what is said might be different from what is done, because tibetans keep a lot of things secret that could be interpreted in an unfavorable way. Things that are common knowledge in the original home countries of Vajrayana, are brushed under the carpet in dealings with westerners. Matters mostly concerend with malevolent sorcery including marana i.e death spells, or practices like subjugation of zombies (vetala), also blood offerings to subjugate evil spirits, and other such things. To get a proper insight into what is really done might unfortunately be impossible.
Some of that aspect of tantric buddhism emerged to public notice during the Shugden crisis and the allied dissonances betwen the two main oracle deities, and also during the controversy concerning the enthronement of the new karmapa some lamas did not keep their mouth shut when in rage.

[srivijaya]

Some of that aspect of tantric buddhism emerged to public notice during the Shugden crisis and the allied dissonances betwen the two main oracle deities, and also during the controversy concerning the enthronement of the new karmapa some lamas did not keep their mouth shut when in rage.

Yes, that controversy opened up a can of worms. It's true that there is much more to this than westerners get to see. I have personally witnessed a Lama being possessed by a spirit. If anyone ever doubts that such a thing is possible they would have changed their opinion if they had been there. I can honestly confess it scared the pants off me.

Perhaps ignorance is bliss to some extent but it's interesting nevertheless.

Namaste

[atanu]

Dear MahaHrada,
This is correct, although at some point during the historical development (perhaps the transfer to Tibet?) the emphasis changed to one of retention. It may also have something to do with the adoption of tantra into a monastic setting but no Tibetan Lamas I have met have ever advocated emission, though like you rightly say, there are such instructions in the source texts.

It remains a paradox.

Namaste

Namaste Srivijaya and MahaHrada,

The paradox, IMO, is not a mystery with the understanding (and experience) of the following Verse:

RV10.061.05 (Rudra), the benefactor of man, whose eager, virile energy was developed, drew it back when disseminated (for the generation of offfspring); again the irresistible (Rudra) concentrates (the energy) which was communicated to his maiden daughter

I feel that it is not an isolated paradox, but part and parcel of a general paradox that the mind faces: Who is Ignorant and Who is under control of Maya, if All is Brahman? This can be understood in another way. Water remains water, but its appearance changes from liquid to solid or to vapour.

Regards

OM

[srivijaya]

RV10.061.05 (Rudra), the benefactor of man, whose eager, virile energy was developed, drew it back when disseminated (for the generation of offfspring); again the irresistible (Rudra) concentrates (the energy) which was communicated to his maiden daughter

Hi atanu,
I'm not familiar with that teaching, so I'm not entirely sure who the maiden daughter was or quite which offspring were generated by Rudra's virile energy. I have a feeling it's similar to the doctrine of Spanda - the transition from the formless, into form and back again?

I understand this though:

Water remains water, but its appearance changes from liquid to solid or to vapour.

A wonderful analogy for the transformation of energy. It goes nowhere, rather transmutes into another manifestation. The question is, in which form the energy is most useful to us; in a wordly external form or an inner subtle form. There are differing opinions on that even between masters, not to mention disciples of various traditions.

Namaste

[atanu]

Hi atanu,
---- The question is, in which form the energy is most useful to us; in a wordly external form or an inner subtle form. ----
Namaste

Namaste Srivajaya,

IMO, the answer to this is

RV10.061.05 (Rudra), the benefactor of man, whose eager, virile energy was developed, drew it back when disseminated (for the generation of offfspring); again the irresistible (Rudra) concentrates (the energy) which was communicated to his maiden daughter.

The daughter is Rudra's own light and warmth, with which He creates or destroys as per His own wish. The virya (water) is product of warmth of Rudra. I think that even if I believe that preserving the virya is necessary, in actuality that may not happen and vice versa --- since it is Ishwara who is the Master.

What I understand is that the creation of virya and its release is a natural effect of interaction of body and food. The harmful part is indulgence in imagination and titillation. Gita teaches that the duty of yogi is to strive gently to bring the wandering mind to the Self repeatedly.

Om Namah Shivaya

[srivijaya]

I think that even if I believe that preserving the virya is necessary, in actuality that may not happen and vice versa --- since it is Ishwara who is the Master.

Hi atanu,
But are you not one and the same with Ishwara? A yogi can direct his intent, he has that freedom no?

Namaste

[atanu]

Hi atanu,
But are you not one and the same with Ishwara? A yogi can direct his intent, he has that freedom no?

Namaste

Namaste Srivijaya,

There are few points to consider.

My understanding is that no one can be same with Ishwara, who is a special person similarly as atanu cannot be same as srivijya. It is a different matter altogether that only at the atmic-brahmic unity level there is no difference and then there is no Ishwara also.

Yes, a Yogi can direct the intent -- but a perfect yogi possibly will not direct his intent. A perfect yogi, as per Advaita undrestanding, is one who merely remains a Seer -- the intents are not his. Moreover, while striving one is a sadhaka and not really a yogi.

Regards,

Om Namah Shivaya