Tantric traditions are based on a class of South Asian
ritual and meditation manuals known as tantras.
The
basic idea of all tantric traditions, whether they are Buddhist, Hindu, or
Jain, is to use ordinary states of mind, specifically states of desire, in the
process of becoming awakened. In most
Buddhist and Hindu traditions, and in both major Jain monastic traditions, the
renunciation of the ordinary life of desire is considered a prerequisite for
committing oneself to the path of awakening or liberation. However, the tantric traditions seek to use
desire on the path of awakening rather than renounce it altogether.
This does not mean that the tantric traditions encourage
self-indulgence. Rather, what they
really do, at least in theory, is to encourage people to transcend base desires
using the wisdom at the heart of every one of them. The wisdom of the Buddha and the
Buddha-Nature, or in the tantric Hindu context, of Shiva-Shakti and one’s true
identity as Shiva-Shakti, exist in all situations, including those involving
sensual desire, and can be realized in all situations, including those
involving sensual desire. It is this
insight that the tantric traditions seek to utilize in the pursuit of wisdom
through desire.
Other major practices of the tantric traditions include
secret rituals and initiation ceremonies, complete dedication to one’s guru as
equivalent or identical to a deity or a buddha (depending on the tradition,
though Tibetan Buddhism includes both), elaborate visualization practices (of
deities and other important beings), the use of mandalas (or maps of the cosmos) and yantras ( or geometric designs representing deities and concepts), the
use of mudras (or stylized hand
gestures – though this word also refers to “parched grain,” one of the five
taboo substances discussed below), and the use of mantras (best translated as “sacred phrases”).
Ritualized sex is part of the tantric traditions of Buddhism
and Hinduism, at least in theory (and often in practice as well), but it is not
the central practice of any form of
tantrism, whether Buddhist or Hindu (and it is absent in Jainism, the tantric
tradition of which is of the extreme “right hand” variety). However, sexual intercourse is one of the five
things that were traditionally taboo for monks and mendicants to do in South
Asian society, along with consuming alcohol, eating meat, eating fish, and
eating parched grain, all of which tantric practitioners did and still do
either literally or symbolically. These
five taboos are known as Panchamakara,
or the “Five M’s” – because they all begin with that letter in Sanskrit. Antinomian behavior, which consists of
engaging in the “Five M’s” as well as other taboo activities, is part of many
tantric traditions. It is very prominent
in the Kagyu tradition of Tibetan Buddhism, as well as in the Kapalika and non-tantric
Pashupata traditions of Shaivism and the tantric Kalikula traditions of
Shaktism, all of which can safely be categorized as “left-hand” forms of
tantrism (with the Pashupata simply being a form of “left-hand”
cremation-ground asceticism rather than left-hand tantrism).
However, other tantric traditions, such as the Geluk sect of
Tibetan Buddhism headed by the Dalai Lama, the popular Shaiva Siddhanta
tradition of Southern India, the householder tradition of monistic Shaivism
that is usually known as “Kashmir Shaivism” (and which is based on Kapalika or
“Cremation-Ground” Shaivism, but no longer incorporates that element of the
Shaiva tradition in practice), and the Srikula traditions of Shaktism,
discourage antinomian behavior almost entirely (or even altogether), allowing
it only for the most advanced practitioners, and even then only on rare
occasions. These “right hand” tantric
traditions interpret the “Five M’s” symbolically, and often go out of their way
to discourage antinomianism among their practitioners, especially their
monastics and priests.
Evan, my friend with the encyclopedic mind, I bet you wrote half of this from memory and referred to sources mainly for the spelling or interesting parenthetical nuances. The funniest parenthetical comment, though, is your own, "the Newar tradition of Buddhism in Nepal (which I will not cover in this series)," which implies that you'll cover pretty much every other branch of Buddhism, a fact I don't doubt.
ReplyDeleteThis article takes some of the marketability out of tantric practices . . . first we learn the word is an umbrella for certain rituals and manuals, then we learn that some of the rituals celebrate right-handed abstinence. What we are left with is the realization that tantric tradition, as a whole, attempts to allow individuals to reach their spiritual maturity without disowning their natural inclinations (although reigning them in at times).
Me? I get lost in the varieties, and, although I understand Christianity much better, find myself chilled by its varieties. All that to say, people like me who are looking for the one thesis or one revelation to rule them all need people like you to keep track of the multitudinous ways our thinking and our organizations split up, shimmer momentarily, and regroup in search of a better way.
I really like your succinct summary of tantric traditions at the end of the second paragraph. It is true of most traditions, with the exception of the extreme left-hand traditions, which, while not the most popular forms of tantrism by any means, do exist. (The Aghoris, a radical sect of Hindu Shiva-worshippers, are one example.) But I try to avoid focusing too much on the "exotic" in religion because I think it almost inevitably causes traditions to be misunderstood. If I want to explain Christianity to people, I would never start by talking about the Penitentes or the Shakers. Describing the tantric traditions by starting with the Aghoris or the devotees of Kali who propitiated her with human sacrifice would lead to similar distortions, even if the information presented was accurate. As for Buddhism, I will try to cover all the traditions that have had a significant number of followers in this series, but like any tradition with such a long history and broad geographic distribution, there is no way I can cover them all.
ReplyDeleteI too get lost in the varieties. And I too would absolutely love to find the "one thesis or one revelation to rule them all" if it exists. I would be happy to discover it even if was the most depressing discovery I ever made. I would rather know the truth, even if it makes me unhappy, than live in darkness. But at the same time, I don't want to believe in that one thesis unless I am absolutely certain it is in fact the one thesis to rule them all. That is why I try to relentlessly understand all these different worldviews: it helps me make sure I don't get too carried away in believing I have found the answers. And lately, I have been trying to be fully committed to the use of reason and experience, and to relentless scrutiny of all experience for even the faintest possibility that it is mistaken.
All this to say, I still have no idea what the truth is, and I am growing more confident by the day that I will never know. I do not greet this news with happiness. To me, the journey itself does not matter. The destination is what is all-important. But at the same time, acknowledging this has set me free in many ways. Self-honesty may be difficult and even unpleasant, but it is ultimately more liberating than living in delusion.