- Edited
Every moment is auspicious!! What an amazing reminder of using all the given time for cultivating Awareness about This - from moment to moment!
Thank you for this Adi!💎❤🙏
EnglishIs Navarātri an Auspicious Time for Sādhanā?
- Edited
Śrī Matre Namaḥ,
My understanding of Kaulācārā, most people would not have any problem intellectually entertaining the dualities of pure/impure but only the true practitioners of Vāmācārā can live with the dualities of pure/impure all the time and use impure things as objects in their worship. The disclaimer being, it takes time for beginners to develop a relationship with a deity, develop good enough bhakti before they can transcend dualities and till that happens, sādhana during auspicious times, visiting auspicious places like Śakti Pīṭhas will do nothing but only good. Or the beginners should have unflinching faith in Guru's word.
Guruji - What has to be emphasized here is that these four traditions within Srividya are essentially all the same – the difference is only in the tools that are used. In fact, I will use a metaphor that has annoyed people before, but one that I believe is accurate and useful in explaining these concepts: Think of the traditions as four toolboxes available to the initiated Srividya upasak.
Why toolboxes? Because a toolbox is something you open when you have a job to do. You reach in and take what you need for the job at hand. Just because a certain tool is in there, doesn't mean you need to pull it out for every job. It's quite likely, in fact, that you will *never* need to use most of these tools. But they are there in case you do.
(Source - http://amritananda-natha-saraswati.blogspot.com/2016/04/traditions-acharas-within-sri-vidya.html)
Guruji - All our pujas are satvic, which empower and hurt none. This is how Kaula pujas are done to willing and consenting adults at Devipuram.
(Source - http://amritananda-natha-saraswati.blogspot.com/2016/04/kaula-achara.html)
Śrī Gurubhyo Namaḥ
kaula does not necessarily meaning kaulācāra. Kaula śāstra, and śaiva-śākta kaulism as a distinct "tantric" revelation enjoins many lineages, ācāras, and śāstras within its folds, practices, and scriptural classifications. Using socially classified "impure" objects and dravyams is not restricted to vāmācāra alone, but used in kaulācāra as well, it just that it isn't required as a substitute is usually made available, be it physical or mantric.
Studying, understanding, and contemplating that every tattva and object is permeated and "lit" with the divine consciousness-presence is not a call to stop pūjā and yātra. Practicing during auspicious times and visiting auspicious places is very beneficial, no doubt, but realizing that Monday is just as joyful and auspicious as Friday will also not hurt practice.
Transcending duality is a common goal of several [but not all] tantric paths and one which is also ritually re-enacted by certain types of practitioners who use "impure" objects and dravyams. It doesn't necessarily mean they have actually attained the goal, more often than not it means they are still practicing to attain it, but are using more extreme means in hopes to arrive quicker. Whether it works or not depends on the qualifications of the practitioner, but the margin of error is much smaller than what is practiced in mainstream Śrīvidyā.
Regardless, practicing the presence of auspiciousness all around oneself, in every moment, and in every place, is indeed an advanced practice both intellectually as well as practically, but one worth at least being exposed to-especially in the common "post-navaratri depression" days that many may be experiencing right now.
śrī gurubhyo namaḥ
- Edited
Adikeshava kaula does not necessarily meaning kaulācāra. Kaula śāstra, and śaiva-śākta kaulism as a distinct "tantric" revelation enjoins many lineages, ācāras, and śāstras within its folds, practices, and scriptural classifications
Again my understanding is that there is no difference between Kaulā or Kaulācārā, the LHP of Tantra (instead of Vāmācārā as the LHP) as is practiced today in whatever leftover form (one exception being the Dattātreya lineage at Devipuram) and many of the schools of Śaivism (Vol. 5 of A History of Indian Philosophy by S. Dasgupta) seem to have contributed to the development of Kaulācārā. Vāmācārā influenced the transgressive practices of Kaulācārā or the practitioners of Vāmācārā took the impurity from Kaulācārā to the extreme level is very unclear. Only Dattātreya can settle the debate.
The video below (not the original channel) is all about Kaula tantra by Prabhuji Institute.
Adikeshava Transcending duality is a common goal of several [but not all] tantric paths and one which is also ritually re-enacted by certain types of practitioners who use "impure" objects and dravyams
I think all tantric schools accept that the world is real and not separate from Divine but a manifestation of Divine.
Adikeshava Whether it works or not depends on the qualifications of the practitioner, but the margin of error is much smaller than what is practiced in mainstream Śrīvidyā.
Not sure, I follow this.
Adikeshava but one worth at least being exposed to-especially in the common "post-navaratri depression" days that many may be experiencing right now.
Agree.
@"deviupasaka"
Everyone is entitled to believe whatever they like about kaula tantra and its many ācāras, but if one keeps learning and re-learning then one will possess different types of knowledge in different phases of ones learning trajectory. I can't help myself but to add that the "LHP" is a misrepresentation and fantasy of kaulism conjured from minds of foreigners who decided they knew the tantric traditions better than anyone else. To be sure, there is no such thing as "the LHP" before 1877.
The video is interesting, although hard to follow. It is clearly a very rough (and at times quite incorrect) outline presentation of what scholars have been painstakingly researching and presenting for the past 45+ years, but with no credit to them. Actually, with all the information they have presented they have failed to cite a single source, tantra, āgama, śāstra, or scholar whom they obvious acquired their information from. Rather, they give the credit to Prabhuji, which is at best a nice devotional attitude to their guru and at worst intellectual dishonesty and plagiarism.
If one were to read even 100 pages of contemporary research on tantra and kaulism a lot of what little I could see from the video would make more sense. Needless to say, I am unfamiliar with the Prabhuji Institute, but there are, of course, as many definitions of tantra and kaula as there are practitioners, however, not all are as equally informed, knowledgeable, or correct.
दत्तात्रेय उवाच:
ज्ञानस्य साधनं मुख्यं देवतानुग्रहः परः
यः सर्वभावतः स्वात्मदेवतामुपसङ्गतः २१.७
तस्य ज्ञानं सुसुलभं भवतीति विनिश्चयः
एतत् सर्वोत्तमं राम प्रोक्तं ज्ञानस्य साधनम् २१.८
Dattātreya spoke:
The principal method to attain knowledge is the supreme grace of the deity. Those who worship the deity with their whole heart and as their own Self will easily attain knowledge. It has been said that this method of obtaining knowledge is the absolute best. —Tripurārahasyam 21.7-8
- Edited
Adikeshava but there are, of course, as many definitions of tantra and kaula as there are practitioners, however, not all are as equally informed, knowledgeable, or correct.
I'm curious on what basis you are saying this? There could be Kaulā gurus hiding in plain sight each with their own understanding and practices from Kaulā and depending on the need of a teaching and the grace of Dattātreya, a sādhaka can meet such a guru and a particular sub-sect within Kaulā may become famous. And no one school can claim to be superior over others as Kaulā itself is an amalgamation of practices from different schools of Tantra which Abhinavagupta further refined and endorsed as the highest and supreme path in Tantra.
That is why Guruji's tool box analogy is perfect I think for all sādhakas on the path of Tantra.
You might be mixing number of different things. It's not about one sect being better then the other.
- There are true kaula guru lineages, which differ in their approach and understanding,
- Within those valid lineages you might have inexperienced practitioners who have not grown in their understanding of the tradition and its teachings, and due to ignorance, think that they have indeed reached that understanding, while in reality, it's not the case; furthermore
- There are also "fake" gurus, which claim to be from an authentic kaula lineage and, while haven't gotten proper initiation, proceed to teach others. As such, you have propagation of miss-information and ignorance.
- Edited
but there are, of course, as many definitions of tantra and kaula as there are practitioners, however, not all are as equally informed, knowledgeable, or correct.
My bad if I confused anyone, my question is on what basis Adikeshava says not all Kaulā practitioners are equally informed, knowledgeable or correct when Kaulā itself was formed from different schools of Tantra and got refined over time? Or am I reading the sentence wrong?
Are you stating that all Kaula practitioners regardless of their experience are equally informed, knowledgeable and correct?
- Edited
I think if you are asking with in one lineage following Kaulā if all those practitioners regardless of their experience are equally informed, knowledgeable and correct? The answer would be definitely no as it depends on the advancement of the practitioners.
As I read what Adikeshava seems to say is there are different thoughts or schools about Kaulā itself and not all these are equally informed, knowledgeable and correct, which I think is incorrect to assume so because Kaulā itself took different things from different schools of Tantra, things which seem to serve all, making Kaulā non-dogmatic.
For example, I have been blessed enough to take diksha in Samayachara, Dakshinachara and Kaulachara paramparas. They are complementary, not conflicting. There is no inherent conflict between the traditions, and those who understand the paths properly know that none rejects the others.
(Source - http://amritananda-natha-saraswati.blogspot.com/2016/04/traditions-acharas-within-sri-vidya.html)
Just like Guruji if some other Guru took diksha in Kaulācārā and endorsed the same tool-box methodology to teach his or her students about Kaulā, how will we ever know if that Guru and his or her lineage are not equally informed, knowledgeable and correct?
deviupasaka if some other Guru took diksha in Kaulācārā and endorsed the same tool-box methodology to teach his or her students about Kaulā, how will we ever know if that Guru and his or her lineage are not equally informed, knowledgeable and correct?
What if he didn't take diksha but read about it somewhere and started teaching? Or what if you have a pseudo-academic giving lectures about Kaulacara without having in-depth understanding of it?
- Edited
What if he didn't take diksha but read about it somewhere and started teaching?
Possible, "fake gurus".
Or what if you have a pseudo-academic giving lectures about Kaulacara without having in-depth understanding of it?
If you put it that way then only one expert on Kaulācārā will have to talk to another expert, be it both academic or pseudo-academic or living the tradition of Kaulācārā, there is no meaning I think in citing sources from Tantric texts most of which were written/translated by foreign authors who are nothing but academic, applicable to not just Tantra but any subject involving mind and body. There are/will be always some exceptions though.
Guruji said, "Make information available. Let people take it or leave it, think it is true or false. All that matters is: Are you convinced that this is the way? Let people judge you as they think fit.
Tell them 'Come here if you like. Don't come if you don't like. Only try to see for yourself. Don't blindly accept what others say.'"