What is tantrik monism

[satay]

Originally Posted by Singhi Kaya

Now Arjuna can do it. For I have given him the e-mail

why don't you pm me dr. frawley's e-mail and I will invite him over.

[sarabhanga]

Namaste Arjuna,

The Natha Sampradaya is derived from a complex amalgam of ancient and medieval Yoga traditions.

From the union of Shiva (Adi) and Shakti (Parvati) came the Rudra-gana Jalandhara (Udaya or Ude), who initiated Matsyendra (Mina) and Jalandhari (Jalandharipa or Hadipa).

Jalandhari initiated Bhartrihari (who became a disciple of Gorakhnatha), Kanipa, and Mainavati (the mother of Gopicanda); and he is the preceptor of the Tibetan and Bengali “Pa” Panthas (as opposed to the “Natha” Panthas). The Jalandharipa or Paonatha Pantha (from Jaipur) is one of the original twelve, but its own origins are more ancient. The group today includes an assortment of Panathas (a.k.a. Papanathas).

While Jalandharipa was trapped at the bottom of a well at Ujjain, his disciple Kanipa temporarily became the head of his order; and when Jalandharipa was finally rescued (through the intervention of Gorakhnatha and Minanatha) he established his own Kanipa (Kalupa or Kalipa) Pantha.

Another division was established by Gopicanda (Canda or Siddha Sangari) who was a disciple of both Jalandharipa and Kanipa ~ and all three lineages are generally included under the Paonatha Pantha.

The “left-hand path” of Yoga is attributed to Jalandharipa, and particularly the teaching of Kanipa; and Gopicanda is the preceptor of most snake-charmers.

Bhartrihari established (or reformed) the Vairaga Pantha, and among his disciples were Premnatha and Ratannatha (from Peshawar).

Mina initiated Gorakh (Goraksha), Pagal (Arjun Naga or Nagarjuna), and his own sons Nemi and Paras (Parshva or Parishva).

Neminatha (Nimnatha) and Parasnatha (Parishvanatha, the Guru of Mahavira) are the 22nd and 23rd Jaina Tirthankaras.

The Naganatha group includes the Madia and the Gala (Rawala Galla or Pagala Pantha), who are Muslim Yogis or Faqirs (originally from Afghanistan); and also the Manmanthi (Mannatha), who trace their lineage from Raja Rasalu.

Gorakhnatha initiated Kapalipa, Karkai, Bhushtai, Shakkarnatha, Satyanatha, Shantokanatha and Lakshmannatha ~ and the remaining Gorakhnatha Panthas are derived through their lineages.

[sarabhanga]

Namaste Arjuna,

Brahmacarya Ashrama certainly is the foundation of all Brahmana Dharma!

Some period of Brahmacarya (not study of the Vedas, but education nonetheless) is also normal for both Kshatriyas and Vaishyas.

Only Shudras have absolutely no rule of Brahmacarya.

Brahmacarya is intended for unmarried students, and Hindu Dharma has ALWAYS assumed celibacy for such individuals (who would usually be less than 20 years old)!

Nowhere is it required that anyone should remain as a celibate student for their whole life, and most Rishis would have passed through all of the Ashramas required by their Dharma. Thus, most Rishis were married and raised a family during their Grihastha Ashrama.

Originally, there were only three Ashramas ~ Brahmacarya, Grihastha, and Vanaprastha (Hermitage) ~ and in the final stage of life, the wise Brahmana would retire from society and from normal family life. But there is no requirement for a Vanaprastha to renounce all contact with his wife and family, who would usually have remained with him (by that time a grandfather) and considered him as their Guru. Indeed, most of the ancient Paramparas are actual genetic family-trees.

[sarabhanga]

Namaste Singhi,

That everyone must become a celibate came from Shankara, which may be a tactic to weaken the Buddhist society.

Shri Shankaracarya NEVER declared that everyone must be celibate ~ the idea is absurd!

Ever since the Sannyasa Ashrama was instituted ~ originally intended for Brahmanas over 60 years old and approaching death ~ there has been absolutely no expectation that Sannyasins would engage in ANY kind of sexual activity.

Given the most rapid progress of a Brahmana (from Brahmacarin directly to Sannyasin, with no intervening period of Grihastha and Vanaprastha) it would be traditionally possible for a prodigy to attain the state of Paramahamsa or Naga by the age of 33 years. In this situation there remains a possibility of sexual activity, and a general rule of celibacy was promoted and generally enforced in all Sannyasin monastic communities (which tradition only became common after about 1,000 BC).

[sarabhanga]

Namaste Arjuna,

We can see that Vidyaranya Yati, who was in Shankara’s lineage (Gaudapada—Govindapada—Shankara—Acharya Vishnu Sharma—Pragalbhacharya—Vidyaranya Yati), advocated Kaula tradition

Shankaracarya had four disciples, and Vishnu Sharma was NOT one of them!

I know nothing of Vishnu Sharma, but it is clear that he was NOT a Dasanami Sannyasin!

There are Yatis in the Dasanami Akhadas, but the term Yati is a very ancient appellation with more general implications. As an Aranya of the Dasanami order, the Svami known as “Shri Vidya” would be associated with Govardhana Matha (in Orissa); and Aranyas are generally learned Hamsas and Paramahamsas (with strict Brahmana traditions).

When Vidyaranya Yati advocated Kaula, he was NOT advocating any teaching that descended from Shri Shankaracarya!

How is Vishnu Sharma connected with Shankaracarya?

[Arjuna]

Originally Posted by sarabhanga

Namaste Arjuna,
Shankaracarya had four disciples, and Vishnu Sharma was NOT one of them!
I know nothing of Vishnu Sharma, but it is clear that he was NOT a Dasanami Sannyasin!
There are Yatis in the Dasanami Akhadas, but the term Yati is a very ancient appellation with more general implications. As an Aranya of the Dasanami order, the Svami known as “Shri Vidya” would be associated with Govardhana Matha (in Orissa); and Aranyas are generally learned Hamsas and Paramahamsas (with strict Brahmana traditions).
When Vidyaranya Yati advocated Kaula, he was NOT advocating any teaching that descended from Shri Shankaracarya!
How is Vishnu Sharma connected with Shankaracarya?

Namaste, Sarabhanga,

I have no idea about historical authenticity of given lineage. The author of Shrividyarnava provides this parampara, and responsibility for this statement is his.
As far as i know, we cannot be sure of Shakara's authorship of Saundarya-lahari even. And i in no way insist that Shankara was a Kaula or whatsoever. I simply conveyed the opinion of my sampradaya, which isn't necessarily historically accurate.