Tantra

[Anonymous No.20588533]

I know that Tantra actually refers to what is basically Hindu/Buddhist magic and occultism. But what is a good book that teaches the more mainstream version of tantra, that is, how to have really good sex, with meditation practices, breathing techniques and all that jazz?

[Anonymous No.20588557]

>>20588533
>how to have good sex
learn to breathe properly
practise kegels
be empathetic

[Anonymous No.20588579]

How about the Kamasutra? I mean it's pretty popular, there must be something to it

[Anonymous No.20588582]

>>20588533
Tibetan (Buddhist) tantra - they keep initiatic lineages, and Indian Tantra like pic. Related (Kashmir Shaivism has no remaining lineage) so just read the books by Arthur Avalon

[Anonymous No.20588591]

>>20588582
*read books by Arthur Avalon as a start

[Anonymous No.20588595]

>>20588582
>Kali Kaula
>Fun and very informative

[Anonymous No.20588638]

>>20588582
>(Kashmir Shaivism has no remaining lineage)
The Hindu school Sri Vidya is a remaining tantric school/lineage within Hinduism that is still alive. Also a good amount of the philosophy and practices of the presently existing Shaivist schools and lineages like Veerashaivas or the Nath yogies or in the monist sub-type of Shaiva Siddhanta is practically the same thing as in the formal 'tantric schools' like KS and they are both derived from the same tantric Agama texts; even when these Shaivist schools always don't strongly identify themselves as being primarily a Tantric school

[Anonymous No.20588645]

>>20588638
*don't always identify

[Anonymous No.20588656]

>>20588638
Also, there is still a secretive monist/non-dualist Shaktist Tantric tradition still practiced almost exclusively among the Newar ethnic group in Nepal. Academics didn't even find out about it until the 1980's or 1990's and it still has no wikipedia article. A portion of their major scripture was published as the manthana bhairava tantra with the help of the KS scholar Dyczkowski who met some members of their community and who was eventually initiated into the tradition.

[Anonymous No.20588764]

>>20588533
This book talks more in dept about how to last longer.

[Anonymous No.20588775]

>>20588533
tantra should never be mainstreamed

https://www.bitchute.com/video/HfiwPtz1ffcr/

[Anonymous No.20588850]

>>20588775
Take your meds

[Anonymous No.20589069]

>>20588533

[Anonymous No.20589080]

>>20588533
that is not tantra, that's new age bs

[Anonymous No.20589088]

>>20588579
Most of Kamasutra is just pajeet dating advice

[Anonymous No.20589249]

>>20589080
Glad to see that the followers of the true doctrine of awakening have such a way with words.

[Anonymous No.20589867]

[Anonymous No.20589976]

>>20588638
>>20588656
I know about Sri Vidya, and Shakta traditions, but that still means Kashmir Shaivism has no remaining lineage.
Bhaskararaya ≠ Kashmir Shaivism, ultimately, it seems the tantras moved into Nepal and Tibet, also I don't speak sanskrit, I'm not ready to memorise 1000 verses of the Lalita Sahasranama, also I've thought over it really, "what is it that im really seeking in these traditions" and I can't label it because there is nothing to seek, to find, to protect, to gain, or to lose, so I will always question whether it's really necessary beyond, a sort of practical development.
>Academics didn't even find out about it until the 1980's or 1990's and it still has no wikipedia article.
Just name it here? You don't have to larp as if there are secrets to keep

[Anonymous No.20589981]

>>20589976
In the current year.

[Anonymous No.20589985]

>>20589976
>Just name it here? You don't have to larp as if there are secrets to keep
I actually dont know what they they call that tradition

[Anonymous No.20589998]

>>20589985
>mentioning and making allusions to things with such odd specific detail, and you don't even have all the information on
Stop posturing. I'm pretty sure the cult of Vajra Yogini in Tibet has some relation to the shakta traditions too have you looked into that? From my observation the different "tantric states of conciousnes" are present across Buddhist and Hindu traditions, do you know about Shakta initiation rituals?

[Anonymous No.20589999]

>>20588533
>how to have really good sex
Be in love with the other person

[Carlo de Bracorens No.20590013]

>>20588582
Uh oh…
Guenonfag’s Advaita chart has a challenger now…

[Carlo de Bracorens No.20590015]

>>20588533
>But what is a good book that teaches the more mainstream version of tantra, that is, how to have really good sex, with meditation practices, breathing techniques and all that jazz?
Picrel

[Anonymous No.20590031]

>>20589998
>Stop posturing.
Lol what? I didnt talk about myself at all and did not relate the topic of what I was saying to myself in any fashion. That's not posturing. I was just sharing some info I knew about an obscure topic because I thought it related to the thread. You shouldn't make those kinds of statements about others so carelessly

[Anonymous No.20590060]

>>20590031
>You shouldn't make those kinds of statements about others so carelessly
I said nothing it doesn't matter, what matters is what you know and the information we can exchange, you seem as if you have taken offence to something I've said, but I've said nothing, so take your meds and relax, but really there is such thing as relaxing or resting, so I can't help you out, if I can't milk more information out of you, not even data in the order of pure quantity and relativity, then you have no more use to me, goodbye.

[Anonymous No.20590063]

>>20590060
*There is no such thing as resting or relaxing

[Anonymous No.20590071]

Was doing a little research on the Kashmir Shaivism lineage stuff, and there is a group now based in Australia that claims to belong to it, that their founder re-connected the tradition and restored the lineage. Evola acknowledged that such a thing was a possible, goes into length about it in one of his essays, and it is something I believe is an exceptional possibility too, but in this case I strongly suspect it is bullshit. Something about the group just feels off to me.

I have seen here people mention that it may survive in familial linages, with householders initiating their sons or something, but IDK.

Would be a true shame if it was completely dead as it is a truly fascinating tradition, one that for me personally happens to feel right and resonant.

[Anonymous No.20590084]

>>20590060
>you seem as if you have taken offence to something I've said, but I've said nothing,
You accused me of posturing and it's a little careless to say someone was posturing without having a good basis for concluding that, I wasn't offended but thought that was worth mentioning as a piece of advice. I don't know much about the Shaktist sect but I did provide the name of the text and translator who worked on it in you want to research it further, there is also this interview related to it

http://www.anuttaratrikakula.org/godess-kubjika-and-her-influence-on-sadaasaya/

[Anonymous No.20590092]

The Vijnana Bhirava Tantra

[Anonymous No.20590132]

>>20590071
>there is a group now based in Australia that claims to belong to it, that their founder re-connected the tradition and restored the lineage. Evola acknowledged that such a thing was a possible,
Sounds like a larp.
>I have seen here people mention that it may survive in familial linages, with householders initiating their sons or something, but IDK.
That's not how initiation works well yes, technically a father could be the guru of his son, and initiate his child (which could technically if we were to go back to medieval India/Nepal/Tibet include the consumption of his own "Father's" semen on the part of the child) but anyway the Guru Parampara of Kashmir Shaivism is finished,
Infact the the last of that lineage "Swami Lakshimanjoo," decided that he would not continue the lineage, and that the videos and audio which he created would be sufficient for the future - take it for what you will.

This information is taken from here
https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/29977/what-is-the-guru-parampara-of-kashmiri-shaivism


>Swami Lakshmanjoo didn't initiate anyone as lineage upholder. But there are still several living disciples initiated by him like Mark Dyczkowski, etc...

>In this way, the tradition of Kashmiri Shaivism is running. This is just a surface view. The tradition is still running but is secret as a teacher doesn't have only 1 disciple and as he has many branches also. for eg. Kubjika tradition is found alive among Newars living in Kathmandu Valley of Nepal. Similarly, in the hidden way Tantrik traditions are running. When Swami Lakshmanjoo was asked why he isn't appointing lineage upholder and how will people in future get this knowledge, he told that these videos and audio recordings will work.
>>20590092
Larp
>>20590084
Just get over it.

[Anonymous No.20590139]

>>20590132
And it could not possibly survive intact inside a family, because the last guru of that lineage declared that he would have no successor, and that means he gave noone permission to form a lineage and initiate others.

Anyway, that's that.

[Anonymous No.20590155]

>>20590132
Such a shame if it is completely extinguished. But as you suggested to the other anon, I will get over it.

[Anonymous No.20590162]

>>20590139
Not *form a lineage, but instead *continue his, anyway, everything which contacts the West in this respect is in some way damaged, and compromises the traditional organisation, and since "Kashmir shaivism" I've noticed has become part of a new wave of Western Orientalist fetishism especially with the way this guru established this foundation, and took on all these Western disciples, established an "internet presence" it just leaves me curious as to what is the real state of such a tradition, the guru declared technically then that it was left to "self-initiation" which really is a dangerous proposition, especially when you're telling people to "self-initiate" based on this vulgarised and popularised image of "Kashmir Shaivism" which has been established in the west.

[Anonymous No.20590165]

>>20590162
I don't know if the guru intended this outcome really, but really what we know of Kashmir shaivism, is in large part the fruit of the disciples which established these things after the fact - at least to my knowledge.

[Anonymous No.20590169]

>>20590155
It's not a matter of *if it is
It is 100%
As that post above implies, the way the guru parampara works, is a lineage succession - that is nor something ambiguous, the last "Swami Lakshimanjoo" died and Decided not to appoint a successor to this "lineage." So it is definitively broken.

[Anonymous No.20590171]

>>20590132
>Just get over it.
I'm perfectly serene and placid buddy; Im not so sure about you though

[Anonymous No.20590198]

>>20590169
This is from his website.

"The statement made by Swamiji regarding initiation through the video was recorded in 1990 during his revelation of the Bhagavad Gita. At that time he was asked how will people be initiated when you are gone? To this, he replied pointing at the camera “Through viewing this”. You have to understand that Swamiji is not his body. Swamiji is a Universal being existing everywhere. And, he can grace you with initiation while viewing his image through watching a video or through any image of Swamiji’s such as his puja picture. You can even be graced with initiation during a dream or walking down a pathway. I hope this answers your questions."

Whats up with this stuff lol? Sounds like the tradition was already going off the rails.

[Anonymous No.20590199]

>>20590084
Similar iconography to this Tibetan buddhist tantric deity

[Anonymous No.20590224]

>>20590198
Yeah I don't know about that...
Maybe he was playing a joke on the western larpers, I have already interacted with many people who claim to have been initiated in their dreams by Swami Lakshmanjoo or he appeared in their dreams and told them they were now part of the Kashmir shaivism club, this is dangerous because we all know that our dream state is something we ourselves generate, and some of these people believe that entities are "initiating" people in their dreams, a tantric initiation is a real process effected by a lineage guru, who standardises the process, that is what separates an initiate from a mystic, all those people are "mystics" then, I'm not saying its impossible for a "self-initiation" to take place, but consider the obvious mystical potentially dangerous results that would have.

[Anonymous No.20590236]

>>20590198
>>20590224
According to Guénons standards this is classic counter-initiation, there is really nothing at all "mystical" about initiation, but people who listen to such an instruction will start "desiring" initiation, and they will conjure fantasies, that's not avoidable, they will become susceptible to passive influences, the whole point of initiation is in fact contrary to such a thing.

[Anonymous No.20590243]

>>20590236
This is unless this "swamiji Lakshimanjoo " has fully digitised and recorded a proper abisheka or diksha ceremony so to speak, but it seems to me people are instead opting for a "fantasise and get initiated in my dreams" route, which indicates that no such thing has taken place.

Okay that's enough on that subject.

[Anonymous No.20590255]

Its a shame Kashmiri Shaivism seems gone

[Anonymous No.20590274]

>>20590255
To the contrary its representatives degenerated to the point where it had to go, so that its no longer around is best.

[Anonymous No.20590279]

>>20590274
That is also very sad, but it seems like that was the case

[Anonymous No.20590316]

>>20590279
Cry about it.

[Anonymous No.20590357]

>>20590255
you can still practice and study other kinds of non-dual and monistic Shaivism that still exist and that share a lot of the same ideas as Kashmir Shaivism you know

[Anonymous No.20590367]

>>20590357
Oh really? Can provide any examples (and ideally some good books about them)

[Anonymous No.20590384]

>>20590092
A number of so-called wrathful deities are actually manifestations of Avalokiteshvara, the bodhisattva of coompassion. Bharaiva iirc is associated with Vajrapani baptizing Shiva

[Anonymous No.20590805]

>>20590367
This page talks about the many schools of Shaivism, almost all of them are still around and accessible and have scriptures and yogic sastras that been translated. The Shaiva Siddhanta sect it mentions is pretty old and started out as dualist but it now has a monistic variant that is also popular

https://www.virashaiva.com/shaivism/

[Anonymous No.20590823]

>>20588582
Kashmiri Shaivism is fucking Based

[Carlo de Bracorens No.20590855]

>>20590823
Qrd on Kashmiri Shaivism please >>20590823

[Anonymous No.20591060]

>>20589249
Here to fuck and tan, trick. Ain't here to felate you with my dick-shun.

[Anonymous No.20592531]

>>20589999
Based quads.

[Anonymous No.20593007]

>>20590092
Wait, the Tibetan tantric practices actually prays to destroy their enemy? I thought the cope was that they're too compassionate to do that which was why they let themselves got overrun by the Mongols, Manchus and Chinese. Guess that Tantra can't stop bullets huh.

[Anonymous No.20593393]

>>20589999
>>20589867
>>20589088
>>20589069
>>20588764
>>20588557
>>20588579
Only relevant answers.
The rest of the thread is anons masturbating over hindubabble.

[Anonymous No.20593517]

>>20590384
>Vajrapani baptizing Shiva
what does that mean

[Anonymous No.20593547]

>>20590132
>Guru Parampara of Kashmir Shaivism is finished
theres a guy on youtube from the neighbouring state of kashmir who claims to be one of the lineage holders of himalayan shaivaism and claims that kashmir shaivism is a false title since it was never localised just to kashmir anyway
he says there was a triad of regions that were the main centers of esoteric himalayan lineages of which kashmir is no longer a part (cause of muslim invasion i'm guessing)

[Anonymous No.20593567]

>>20593517
It means "my god beats your god;" at least that's what happens in the texts. Since a good deal of Vajrayana tantric literature is just an overt cut-and-paste of Saivism there has to be a contextual explanation given by the Buddhist writer as to why this is allowed since it is so clearly not canonical to either established Mahayana or "Hinayana" scriptures. By the time Buddhism dies out in India it is nearly Hinduism. This what gets adopted in Tibet eventually, though to their credit the Tibetans preserve nearly all the Sanskrit Buddhist literature they can get, so you end up what is exoterically a very Hindu and polytheistic religion but to anyone who can read it is philosophically a continuation of the pre-tantric Mahayana, especially Madhyamaka

[Anonymous No.20594627]

>>20588557
fpbp

[Anonymous No.20595286]

>>20593007
They don't stupid meme,
>>20593547
>kashmir shaivism is a false title since it was never localised just to kashmir anyway
Correct, the "Kashmir shaivism" meme is just exaggerated in the west, there is no such exclusion, "Kashmir Shaivism" via Abhinavagupta was the amalgamation of many traditions, many of which still continue today, from Tibet to Nepal, to wherever else.
>>20593567
>Since a good deal of Vajrayana tantric literature is just an overt cut-and-paste of Saivism there has to be a contextual explanation given by the Buddhist writer as to why this is allowed since it is so clearly not canonical to either established Mahayana or "Hinayana" scriptures.
I would disagree and rather say both are probably copy pastes of a more northern tradition, there is also absolutely nothing polytheistic about tantra - the "Gods" do not maintain independent existences in the most esoteric parts of these traditions, that is just an exoteric misunderstanding. In fact the Gods are not "Real" beyond constituting determined aspects of the relative Ground, the highest tantras of Tibet go beyond that, the "dzogchen" traditions, and in fact it's all about realisation of the "indestructible bindu" "city" "jewel" in the heart via the "crystal kati channel" this is obviously the Atman, and this tradition is more upanishadic than "saivite,"
Mahamudra practices are precursor to these dzogchen or great perfection practices, and yes that has parralels, for example the "yab-yum" is pretty much the "siva-sakti" but the dzogchen texts even go beyond "yab-yum" and call it an uneccesary dualism in the various Dzogchen cycles like the Yangti Nakpo, and instead opt for this pure realisation of "indestructible bindu" in the heart which is really "rigpa," in fact it has a striking parralel to Advaita the trinity "satcitananda" except "bliss" is replaced with "empty essence" which is infact the most blissful thing, and is merged with "clarity" which is a sort of lucidity, or hey describe it as a lucidity and "illuminating light" which you can experience in meditiation - by questioning what is my awareness and so on, and then third is described as inseperable unity, which is the being itself realised as the unity and insuperable nature of this "empty essence" and luminous clarity.

That dzogchen practice is viewed unanimously as being of a higher order than the "saivite tantra" borrowings, there are also various daoist borrowings and practices which were also transmitted into the Tibetan traditions.

"Madhyamaka" is just a philosophical label, and the most contemplative aspects go beyond "philosophy" and ideas as such and instead into the domain of pure experience, the "middle way" and this idea of "free from extremes" is loosely interpreted as just a vague sort of nondualism then, and has no meaning, the whole point in the Tibetan practices is realising the Reflexive conciousness, and there are many many texts, which make fun of the denial of that reflexivconciousness

[Anonymous No.20595305]

>>20595286
Guénonfag can't distance Buddhism from Advaita when the highest esoteric traditions of the former match up so much with Advaita, unless we admit that the Vedanta somehow influenced Tibetan Buddhism, or otherwise that such a thing was already in Buddhism from the beginning that's another question, well anyway I can't think of any other closer teaching to advaita then this sort of Buddhism, the refutations of shankara in the Bhasya and guénonfags typical logic contra Buddhism, doesn't add up then.

[Anonymous No.20595339]

>>20595286
>the whole point in the Tibetan practices is realising the Reflexive conciousness, and there are many many texts, which make fun of the denial of that reflexivconciousness
Good post. I would add that this part is not true for Gelugs, for whom reflexive consciousness exists neither conventionally nor absolutely. According to Tsongkhapa a definitive trait of Prasangika Madhyamaka is denying reflexive consciousness even empirically or at a conditional level. This position of Tsongkhapa/Gelug was refuted by other Tibetans like Mipham who argued that its has to be accepted at least on a conditional level or too many absurd consequences follow. According to Paul Williams Tsongkhapa was the first Buddhist writer he is aware of to explicitly say Madhyamaka rejects reflexive awareness at the conventional level and that all the Indian writers pre-Tsongkhapa seem to be attacking it existing absolutely and not conventionally; that it was a novel interpretation of Tsongkhapa that wasnt in the older Indian texts.

[Anonymous No.20595368]

>>20595305
>Guénonfag can't distance Buddhism from Advaita when the highest esoteric traditions of the former match up so much with Advaita
They still differ philosophically even if experientially they are both trying to awaken someone to the presence of the Atman or Absolute within the heart.
> well anyway I can't think of any other closer teaching to advaita then this sort of Buddhism
The Korean Xen teacher Chinul also talks about practically the same thing e.g. unaffected numinous awareness, and unlike a popular Tibetan position he doesn’t say the reflexive awareness is only conventionally-existent afaik but just presents it as the Absolute unqualified

[Anonymous No.20595391]

>>20595368
>the same thing e.g. unaffected numinous awareness, and unlike a popular Tibetan position he doesn’t say the reflexive awareness is only conventionally-existent
I think that people should be allowed to think there is no reflexive conciousness absolutely, if they meditate and arrive at this conclusion then that is just reflective of their own capacity, the whole scholastic debate larp is not around anymore, the gelugpas I don't think debate such things anymore after the Tibetan exodus.

[Anonymous No.20595400]

>>20595391
Besides in these traditions, we are talking about a sort of supra-rational activity,
A recent text I was reading said, if you can't realize awareness that would include absolutely denying it, then you're no different than a corpse, so all these debaters are corpses, who cares what corpses talk about?
You arrive at the certainty of reflexive conciousness via meditation, it is not something merely theoretical.

[Anonymous No.20595444]

>>20595286
>there is also absolutely nothing polytheistic about tantra - the "Gods" do not maintain independent existences in the most esoteric parts of these traditions, that is just an exoteric misunderstanding
well if you had finished reading zoomie, I did say
>you end up what is exoterically a very Hindu and polytheistic religion but to anyone who can read it is philosophically a continuation of the pre-tantric Mahayana

[Anonymous No.20595655]

>>20595391
>I think that people should be allowed to think there is no reflexive conciousness absolutely, if they meditate and arrive at this conclusion then that is just reflective of their own capacity,
Perhaps but I have an interest in ascertaining what the truth is and so for me personally I will still be interested in the arguments for what the truth is viz one position over the other. If reflexive consciousness exists absolutely then obviously a certain portion of what Tibetan Buddhist writings say about it is nullified even if they happen to get plenty of other details about consciousness correct; and at the end of the day this is going to be an important detail for a certain amount of people. Also it should be clearly noted that not all reflexive awareness is the same; a major difference between how it is articulated by Buddhists and Advaitins is that Advaitin all reject the concept of sahopalambha-niyama, which is a Yogachara-derived idea that the witnessing awareness is non-different from the objective witnessed/known content like thoughts. The Yogacharins Dharmakirti and Dinnaga accept a sahopalamha-niyama version of reflexive awareness where individual thoughts-moments are self-revealed to themselves without any separate observer or awareness (under standard interpretation this means every sensation or thought is divided into an objective pole with the content and also a subjective pole or dimension to it that registers the objective content); Shankara despite accepting the premise of reflexive awareness himself as well still provides a very strong refutation of this Yogachara theory of mind in his writings and this is expanded on by later Advaitins like Vimukatman and others who refute it at greater length. This way of understanding awareness from Dharmakirti etc influences a lot of later Buddhism and is one of the most common or dominant ways of understanding awareness in mahayana/vajrayana generally. This is why when the Tibetan Mipham briefly mentions Advaita in some work he doesn't understand why or how they can say there is an eternal unchanging consciousness when visual data etc and other kinds of knowledge are constantly changing and shifting and he says thats contradictory, it's because Mipham doesn't know the Advaita position and apparently doesn't even consider the possibility that those changing things are not consciousness but are just insentient phenomena revealed by it or reflected in it while consciousness itself remains actually totally spotless, partless and unaffected
>Theythe whole scholastic debate larp is not around anymore, the gelugpas I don't think debate such things anymore after the Tibetan exodus.
Advaita
In the monastic colleges and institutions in India, Nepal and I think also Tibet it's still the standard practice to study and practice debate as part of the curriculum and to study the arguments against the other schools etc just as they have done for centuries.

[Anonymous No.20595716]

op you get exactly what you put into your tantric practice. so if you're trying to satisfy your needy, hungry desire for physical pleasure you'll dig a nice big pit for yourself. better to address your neediness in the first place, and how your neurosis prevents you from really falling in love with the situations you find yourself in.

>>20589999
beyond based

[Anonymous No.20595933]

>>20595655
>a major difference between how it is articulated by Buddhists and Advaitins is that Advaitin all reject the concept of sahopalambha-niyama, which is a Yogachara-derived idea that the witnessing awareness is non-different from the objective witnessed/known content like thoughts
dzogchen agrees here, thoughts are made sure to be distinguished from reflexive consciousness, infact even the thought which may arise that is an awareness of an awareness is identified as not there yet, thoughts and discursive activity, those thought-moments are in no way identified with the primordial rigpa, which is in fact pre-awareness (there are various methods to initially provoke this, e.g deep meditiation and then the instructor will scream and you observe the moment before you become aware of the scream etc.), the observer of those thoughts which you are instructed to just witness and "let be," eventually those thoughts cease, but you can still think without thinking, awareness itself when identified as an object is cut through, eventually you rest in a groundless ground, and you do so continuously, to my understanding the thoughts themselves and the awareness of them do have a separate observer, they are distinguished in the sense that one is primordial and unborn, and they are "observed
>As this says, the naturally arising wisdom that is mind’s inherent nature, and which has always accompanied your ordinary mind from time immemorial, will dawn. This is no different from the inherent nature of everything, and so it is also called the actual clear light of the genuine nature.
>As a result of cultivating your mind’s own natural clear light, the obscurations of ordinary thinking and the habits it creates will be naturally cleared away, and the twin aspects of omniscient wisdom will effortlessly unfold. With this, as you seize the stronghold of your own primordial nature, the three kāyas will be accomplished spontaneously.
>he doesn't understand why or how they can say there is an eternal unchanging consciousness when visual data etc and other kinds of knowledge are constantly changing and shifting and he says thats contradictory,
well that it is changeless is clearly established in what i have read, that it is primordial, self-knowing, beginning-less and endless is clear, it seems as though thoughts and such, and all things are in fact just observed, and told to "let be" they eventually completely cease, and this state is always present, in waking and sleeping, i would say that thinking it is eternal to begin with is irrelevant, thinking that it is unchanging, and forming it as an object is not the way to actually get there, in that way we are dealing with a primordial objectless whole subject, or the essential nature of the phenomenal objects, not the phenomena itself. an "all-creating king" as it says in the Kulayarāja Tantra.

[Anonymous No.20595939]

>>20595933
Regarding Kulayaraja or Kunjed Gyalpo, Norbu comments:

>Raja, or gyalpo, means "king" and kulaya, or kunjed, means the "creator," or "radiator" of all manifestation. Literally it could be rendered "all-creating king" or "creator king." But what does this actually mean? Always and solely it refers to the state of consciousness, regardless whether one calls it Dzogpa Chenpo or bodhicitta. Kunjed Gyalpo thus denotes the primordial state of each individual. Why, then, is it called "creator"? Because all of samsara and nirvana, everything that we consider positive or negative, everything that we differentiate, defining it as good or bad, and so forth, can be compared to a reflection in a mirror. The state of consciousness, on the other hand, is like the condition of the mirror that remains clear and pure without changing. Thus all phenomena arise from the state of consciousness in the same way that reflections appear on the surface of a mirror: hence it is called Kunjed Gyalpo, "the all-creating king."

would you say there is anything wrong in that interpretation in any way?

[Anonymous No.20595970]

>>20595655
>while consciousness itself remains actually totally spotless, partless and unaffected
this is acknowledged, what we see, sense, and think are phenomenal, whilst the observer of all that which ive been referencing in my posts is infact the primordial originally pure witnesser, and really it doesn't matter to me what is 'considered' about the phenomena, something relative in terms of the absolute is strictly nil,
>In the monastic colleges and institutions in India, Nepal and I think also Tibet it's still the standard practice to study and practice debate as part of the curriculum and to study the arguments against the other schools etc just as they have done for centuries.
debate is of benefit only in the sense of a dialogue for example with the ancient greeks, absolutely everything or nothing at all,

what do you think about a quote like this

"Within mind itself – the essence of awakened mind –
There is no view to cultivate in meditation,
No conduct to undertake,
no fruition to achieve, no levels of realization or paths to traverse,
no mandala to visualize, no recitation, repetition, or stage of completion,
no empowerment (initiation) to be bestowed, and no samaya (vows) to uphold.
(...)
Unchanging and ever-present, the embodiment of the kayas and timeless awareness is the conferral of the supreme, naturally occurring empowerment, like the investiture of a royal heir.
Since the universe of appearances and possibilities is timelessly and spontaneously present,
there is no need for concerted effort, for it is spontaneously present by nature."

— Chö Ying Rinpoche'i Dzod Che Yawa
(Dharmadhaturatnakoshanama)

[Anonymous No.20595982]

>>20588557
>be empathetic
with women? lmao
The only answer to having good sex is being able to maintain a strong erection

[Anonymous No.20595992]

>>20595970
it is always distinguished "essence of the awakened mind" "dharmata" or "mind-heart" "mind in the heart" "small hidden grain" etc. from the typical manas, or discursive mind, in the same way the sun is at the heart, and the moon at the brain.

[Anonymous No.20596045]

>>20595655
>Mipham doesn't know the Advaita position and apparently doesn't even consider the possibility that those changing things are not consciousness but are just insentient phenomena revealed by it or reflected in it while consciousness itself remains actually totally spotless, partless and unaffected
Where would "insentient phenomena" come from? Buddhism doesn't teach that there is some external cause behind things. Even when later Buddhists give everything a "buddha-nature" that's just another way of expressing the same non-duality inherent to the idea of all phenomena being arisen due to one's mind. Now for AV, since the atman is brahman that means everything that isn't the self-that-is-God, maya, is just kind of stuck—where does it come from? We're told maya is one of brahman's superpowers so that's one way to look at it, but now we have one becoming many (since maya isn't brahman but the illusions he gives off), and this would be rendered nonsensical by the arguments of Madhyamaka Buddhists (or even Yogacara-Madhyamaka; Mipham is commenting on Shataraksita after all, who denies both a one and a many).

[Anonymous No.20596504]

>>20595933
>dzogchen agrees here, thoughts are made sure to be distinguished from reflexive consciousness,
It’s interesting you say this, since afaik later Nyingma philosophers who are seen as ‘codifying’ Nyingma like Mipham awareness is basically non-different from thoughts and perceptions unless I misunderstood him and he only affirms this nominally while elsewhere recognizing implicitly one as primordially sentient and unborn and the other as transient and insentient and thus as not the same. Mipham cites Longchenpa, Rongzom and Dzogchen and claims to be explicating the meaning of them but he still writes about the conditionally-real reflexive awareness being the same as thoughts and perceptions. I have read Longchenpa’s Chö Ying Rinpoche'i Dzod Che Yawa, it’s the only Dzogchen text I’ve read. A lot of it seemed very similar to Advaita, but IMO it wasn’t so unambiguous that someone couldn’t interpret it as talking about awareness and thoughts being the same, which apparently is how Mipham interprets him.
> i would say that thinking it is eternal to begin with is irrelevant, thinking that it is unchanging, and forming it as an object is not the way to actually get there,
Advaita agrees, when they say eternal they dont mean eternal in time but unconditioned and immutable and beyond all sorts of limits like time etc. Ever-lasting in time is actually ‘sempiternal’ and not ‘eternal’, the latter of which really means beyond or outside time in English and not lasting forever inside time. Advaita says these things about Brahman to remove misconceptions but they dont teach that you realize Brahman by using these adjectives to build a mental object of It. Saying it is immutable or unchanging I think can play an important role in helping someone to realize their own awareness experientially by helping them discern it via contrasting it with what changes.
>>20595939
>would you say there is anything wrong in that interpretation in any way?
It depends on how its interpreted, which could be any number of ways as its a little vague. He says that the phenomena arise on the surface of the mirror of consciousness like how images arise on a physical mirror, but that’s not actually explaining how or why they arise; are they produced from or by the mirror or are they induced by other causes like how mirror-images are caused by combinations of light and darkness and not the mirror? If they come from the mirror then is it a real transformation of the substance or nature of the mirror, a real creation of something by the mirror or is it a false/illusory appearance generated by some power the mirror has?

[Anonymous No.20596510]

>>20595970
>what do you think about a quote like this
I agree with it completely, I think what its talking about is only really true or actualized for people already at the highest level and the rare people who just sort of intuitively slip or fall into it by chance illumination but for almost all people even though that’s ultimately true, they still have to practice various austerities, vows etc and go through various stages to get there. Absolute is equally present as the numinous awareness inside everyone and isnt any more closer in a forest or cave retreat than on your couch, but the point is that without asceticism and monasticism even when endowed with knowledge of pristine effulgent ever-liberated awareness people still often cannot overcome their former habits and modes of thought and identifications and fully go beyond a state of individuality, or they may for a bit but then fall back into lust (sex/rape scandals among teachers etc) or other rajasic and tamasic behavior.

[Anonymous No.20596845]

So is the pure consciousness an absolute structure of how the mind/brain operates? Or does the pure consciousness signify a higher power outside the mind that is absolute?

[Anonymous No.20597133]

>>20588533
Exit level

[Anonymous No.20597256]

>>20596510
Have you looked into Tögal and Trekchö, aswell as rainbow body? In Togal, there are various practices - moon, sun, flame gazing then sky-gazing, seeing with the heart like space etc. some postures which are embodiments of the 3 kayas - those are the initial practices, but what you achieve with Togal is the 4 visions (real visions) you see mandalas, deities, "vajra chains," rainbows and its not some transient state, eventually at some level, everything you see is glowing and has a luminescence to it (you are literally seeing with the inverted eyes), initially they stress that you must keep your eyes open for this etc. in togal, you have to first before togal reach the end of trekcho, which is "no-thought" or "self-liberating" thoughts and already enter the state of that primordial mind, etc.
everything you literally that is the visions in togal, are empty and so forth, but are of the nature of clarity and emptiness, and the different colours you observe - are the colours of the 5 buddha families etc. this all becomes intuitive, you see deities in union in the sky, and so on,

eventually you reach rainbow body, you can at will dissolve the body if you want (there are different levels to this, e.g you can manifest and generate lights and rainbows visible to other people, your body can shrink to the size of an infant, disappear leaving behind finger nails and hair, leave behind nothing) , but usually most maintain their form until death, what do you think? It is also common for people who have attained rainbow body to maintain their body, to serve as temple "energy sources" or relics, to have their ashes put into pills for cultivators etc.

is there an equivalent to such practices which you've so far encountered, what are you thoughts on this?

[Anonymous No.20597269]

>>20597256
>everything you see is glowing and has a luminescence to it
everything looks like a translucent rainbow essentially, everything vibrates, your speech echoes, you are aware of everything, and so forth.

[Anonymous No.20597294]

>>20593567
>Vajrayana
Adharmic bullshit. Fuck off.

[Anonymous No.20597366]

>>20597294
larper.

[Anonymous No.20597375]

>>20597294
Imagine how smooth your brain must be if the only thing you got out of studying indian religion was to call things "dharmic" or "adharmic" like you were some volcano demon from Sinai