What is tantrik monism

[Singhi Kaya]

I am not quiet sure what is meant by Anandamatha. Do U refer to Anandamarga, a sect recently founded by Sarkar (forgot his first name) and still existing in Bengal?
I saw some swamis from that organization in Kolkata. They aren't kaulas and the whole of Anandamarga teaching is a kind of mixture of yoga and politics. I heard some things about illegal dealings of Sarkar himself but not sure if these are true.
Please correct me if i am mistaken.
Or do U refer to some local bengali tradition "Anandamata" (teaching of bliss)?

No I don't belong to anandamarga. I only know about that organization as one which had clashes with the communist regime in bengal. There was a famous incident more than a decade back when some of the monks of that order were murdered in broad day light. I don't know much about their belief, little I have heard points to a bhavabadi organization (the term we use for spiritual oraganizations who use sentimentalism and imagination istead of sceintific yoga and philosophy). Neither I refer to "Anandamata".
AnadaMatha (Matha as in JoshiMatha) is the tradition of swami satyananda saraswati ji - the founder of Shaktibad doctrine. Details of what I know will be provided below.

That phrase refers specifically to Kaulas (not to every Shakta-upasaka of course).
The idea of 5 Makaras is a latter development, we do not find it in early Tantras. Tantraloka was written in 10th century e. v., while all bengali and other Kaula-tantras that mention 5M were written significantly later.
Of course, in current practice five dravyas are used — in my paramparas also.

Oviously, I didn't knew about this.

That's true, but i think that those who just want to drink, eat meat and f##k can easily do that without alleging Tantra. Nowadays there is no such a problem, one doesn't have to hide his inclinations. In fact it's troublesome for pashu to go through rituals or dhyana in order to fill his stomach
However i agree that without pashu-bhava there is usually no vira-bhava (BTW this is a statement of Kalivilasa-tantra).

And without Vira-bhava there is no Divya bhava? - may be true in the general sense. AnandaMatha tradition as I have read, didn't involve any Vira-Bhava rituals.

Well, regarding 2000 years that cannot be proved. Personally i doubt any such teaching could survive from that time. And no evidences are there.
Even Vedism is finished (there are shrauta-brahmanas even now, but they are a small minority and do not follow THAT Vedic religion anyway), what to say of any marginal cults. Vratyas also didn't survive, although some sects go in their line.
While U mention writings of Ur Paramaguru, why don't U reveal his name? He is not a secret person if he published books. Of course, that's up to U.

.
Well there is an element of faith on my part here. swamiji has written, there were texts which he had read which show the tree from Gaurapada swami (the param guru of Adi Shankaracharya) to his time. He was 142nd in the line. Simple arithmatic imples it actually should be much older than 2000 years - may be couple of thousand years more. Both Gourapada swami and Govindapada swami were said to be alive for 1000 years. All these enters a realm which doesn't make much meaning to me. I accept it since swamiji wrote it somewhere, and is quite insignificant a point to me since it doen't mean anything for Shaktibad. Had swamiji been alive and I was following the path of the anandamatha tradition beyond the basic, it may been much more important.

So U have got initiations into two lines, one of Swami Satyananda and another — that Anandamata U mentioned previously?
About Satyananda i heard of course, some of his books have been published here in Russia. He was not a Kaula teacher (i cannot say whether he was an adept; it's typical for India to teach openly pashu-dharma and keep inside Virachara) but gave a kind of kriya-yoga.

Swami Satyananda=Anandamatha Tradition
And Kriya Yoga (if you mean the shamyacharan lahiri's line which is still alive in bengal and elsewhere in the world) has little to do with this. I have got very little knowledge of Tantras. But to me the entire anadamatha tradition starting from the basic is divya bhava upasana. It's focus is in Tantrik Yoga. I'll elaborate in the next post.

Something like that
Although i am not sure the diksha system is everywhere the same even in Bengal. Usually purnabhisheka and kaulabhisheka are taken as synonims. And yes, it comes after initial diksha (samanya) and specific (vishesha).

Anadamatha has 8 stages of initiation - swamiji wrote in his autobiography, that it took 10-12 years to complete all initiations and enter Raja Yoga.

[Singhi Kaya]

Anandamatha Tradition:-

There were 3 hidden Mathas before adi shankaracharya established the 4 Mathas in 4 corners of bharat.

The 3 hidden Mathas are

• Matha – Sumeru

Khestra – Kailash
Sampradaya – kArshikA

• Matha – Paramattma

Khestra – Manasarovar
Sampradaya – Satya

• Matha – Ananda

Khestra – Anubhuti
Sampradaya – Brahmananda (Gaurapada swami)


So this is an ancient lineage. Sannyasins of this tradition take the title of saraswati after completing all stages of initiation. This title should not be confused with the Das-nami Saraswati.

Very Brief description of the stages of initiation as in auto-biography of satyananda ji:-

• Shaktabhishek – Upasana of Kali and the mahanisha sandhya.
• Krama Bhishek – Upasana of Tara.
• Purnabhishek – Upasana of Tripura

These 3 initiations are to introduce the 3 principal movements of mahashakti
Kali = iccha shakti – the movement in mahashakti towards creation
Tara = kriya shakti – the movement in mahashakti against creation
Tripura = Jnana Shakti – the movement in mahashakti signifying equilibrium.

Swami Ji says all three are real movements which are present in creatiom’s shakti stage-beyond the Abyaka stage (Turiya Anubhuti).

The basis of the 3 stages is mainly tantrik mantra yoga. It seems only divya chari methods are used and no use of real M’kars are used. There is no charka sadhna. All upasana is done by the sadhak alone and in seclusion. Ofcourse Hatha and Laya yoga are assimilated at various stages as adviced by the Guru.

All the remaining initiations are advanced initions in Hatha and Laya yoga. I briefly name them.
The remaining abhishek’s are –

• Samrajjya Diksha
• Maha Samrajjya Diksha
• Yoga Diksha
• Mah Purna Diksha

Many of the above Diksha’s have multiple stages as can be expected.

At the end of all the above initiations and finishing the purascharana’s the sadhak then takes refuge in Raja Yoga and Akash Vritti. This RajaYoga is 16 step (unlike the 8 step patanjali yoga) and is very advanced meditation technique. One has to stay in Raja Yoga for 12 years before talking Virja or Sannayasa. As we can see even being an “Tantrik” path it is fully ascetic.

[Arjuna]

No I don't belong to anandamarga.

Happy to hear this

AnadaMatha (Matha as in JoshiMatha) is the tradition of swami satyananda saraswati ji - the founder of Shaktibad doctrine. Details of what I know will be provided below.

I got it. Usually "maTha" is written in english with a dash. Since U wrote it in one word i got confused

And without Vira-bhava there is no Divya bhava? - may be true in the general sense. AnandaMatha tradition as I have read, didn't involve any Vira-Bhava rituals.

In this case the teaching of Ananda-matha is yogic and not tantric.
Yoga may not include any Vira-marga (although even later tradition of Natha-yoga did include sexual practices as it is evident from Shiva-samhita and Hathayoga-pradipika), like ashtanga of Patanjali. Tantras usually consider such types of yoga as leading to mitA-siddhi, limited attainment (as opposed to Kula-yoga which gives jIvan-mukti).

Well there is an element of faith on my part here. swamiji has written, there were texts which he had read which show the tree from Gaurapada swami (the param guru of Adi Shankaracharya) to his time. He was 142nd in the line. Simple arithmatic imples it actually should be much older than 2000 years - may be couple of thousand years more. Both Gourapada swami and Govindapada swami were said to be alive for 1000 years.

Adi Shankara lived appr. in 7-8th century C. E. Yes, Shri Gaudapada, paramaguru of Shankara, is considered to be a Shrividya (Tantric) master and the author of Shrividya-ratnasutras. This is not proved historically, but traditionally accepted.
Theoretically thus, lineage of Satyananda could be traced to this time (if we admit that line was unbroken and the Kula-parampara was kept).
However it isn't proper to think that each and every matha and dashanami-sannyasi is related to this Shrividya lineage through Shankara. Some are, but as i know minority. Only those who are initiated through kaulabhisheka are fully initiated into Shrividya and can be gurus to pass the lineage further.
Of course i cannot know about Satyananda being Kaula or not. As i said, it is common in India to hide one's true practice (which is literally in accordance with Tantric teaching about gupti), i even heard that Shivananda was in fact Tantric — though in his books he wrote nonsense on this subject. Mat be...

And Kriya Yoga (if you mean the shamyacharan lahiri's line which is still alive in bengal and elsewhere in the world) has little to do with this. I have got very little knowledge of Tantras. But to me the entire anadamatha tradition starting from the basic is divya bhava upasana. It's focus is in Tantrik Yoga. I'll elaborate in the next post.

No, i didn't mean Babaji's lineage of kriya-yoga (i am aware it is existing, and not only in Bengal ).
There is no other Tantric yoga apart from that of Kula (in broad definition of this term). System of Satyananda is for sure yogic, but where is the reason to consider it to be Tantric? We do not know what he followed for himself (he might have been Vira, Kaula or whatever), but his teaching — at least as U put it — is not Tantric one.

[sarabhanga]

Namaste Singhi,

Shri Shankaracarya established seven Mathas ~ four Amnaya (manifest directional) Maths and three purely “experiential” Mathas.

The fifth Matha is Sumeru, the Kshetra is Kailash, the Devi is Maya, and the Sampradaya is Kashi.

The sixth Matha is Paramatma, the Kshetra is Nabha-Sarovara (the Sky), the Devi is Manasi-Maya, and the Sampradaya is Sattva.

The seventh Matha is Sahasrarkadyuti (i.e. Ananda), the Kshetra is Anubhuti, the Devi is Cit-Shakti, and the Sampradaya is Satshishya (i.e. a true disciple of Shri Gaudapada).

All Dashanami Sannyasins who are associated with Jyotish Matha have the suffix Ananda added to their name when they are first initiated as Brahmacaris.

And only after a traditional period of 6 or 12 years are they initiated as Avadhuta, and traditionally only after another 6 or 12 years are they allowed initiation as a Naga.

At the time of Avadhuta Samskara, the Ananda is dropped, and the new Avadhuta or Naga adopts the family name of his Guru (which from Jyotishmatha would be Giri, Parvata, or Sagara).

All of this was expounded by Shri Shankaracarya in his establishment of the Dashanami Sampradaya.

In Dashanami tradition, there is no possibility of a Sarasvati Baba with the Brahmacarya title “Ananda”, because Sarasvatis are all linked to Shringeri Matha and their correct Brahmacarya suffix is Caitanya!

Other than that, Satyananda Sarasvati’s teaching on the three “secret” Mathas is taken straight from Dashanami oral traditions and the writings of Shri Shankaracarya himself.

[Arjuna]

One more point in order to show that Ananda-matha teaching (as represented by Swami Satyananda) is not an ancient Tantric one, but yogic (with some Tantric elements incorporated) is this:
There is no such system of abhisheka correlation to Mahavidyas. In fact tradition of Tripura (i. e. Shrividya) is separate from Kali-kula (which includes or is close to Tara-kula) and is a school in itself. Although there were and are upasakas and masters initiated into both Kulas (like Purnananda for example), even they do not mix up these traditions — which is seen again from Purnananda’s Shritattvachintamani and Shyama-rahasya. In Kali-kula purnabhisheka is connected with Kali-vidya, while in Shrividya — with Shri. There is no hierarchy putting Tripura above Kali or Tara. Each of these great Devis is Parabrahma-svarupini and Paramadevata.
Also, there cannot be any purnabhisheka without this or that type of 5M and sexual involvement. Yes, nowadays i believe it is done in some traditions especially in South India, but that is a violation of Kula-dharma and a sign of degradation of parampara. However in many cases brahmans will SAY that they use none of 5M but in practice they do use all secretly. I personally know several examples of this.
Also, in Tantric tradition there cannot exist a prohibition of sexual act, for Tantra was never restricted to vaidika-sannyasins. It has always been aimed for grihasthas primarily and for avadhutas (which have no prescription for celibacy as i already noted).

Seeing all this, i would state that Satyananda’s system is not Tantra. However this doesn’t mean it is of no use or whatsoever. It has full right to exist for those who are inclined towards full sannyasa in vedic sense. Also, U may go in that way if U will. In this case U won’t be able to marry, that’s all.

[Arjuna]

In fact tradition of Shankara (and of Gaudapada) was Kaula one, which included of course 5M and chakra-sadhanas. However unlike Kali- and Tara-kulas, Shrividya took more conventional, brahmanic appearance, hiding Kaula path from public. It’s outer shell, meant for pashu-sadhakas, was called samayachara (following prescriptions). We can see that Vidyaranya Yati, who was in Shankara’s lineage (Gaudapada—Govindapada—Shankara—Acharya Vishnu Sharma—Pragalbhacharya—Vidyaranya Yati), advocated Kaula tradition in his Shrividyarnava. Moreover, ALL major Shrividya texts are Kaula ones (Vamakeshvari-mata, Parashuramakalpa-sutra, Tripurarnava, Shritattva-chintamani etc.).

Only Lakshmidhara tried to put everything up side down and say that samayachara is the highest one. His point of view became spread in South India, although authentic lineaged kept original Kula-vidya. Other degraded into mere ritualism and yoga. Supremacy of Kaula interpretation (which is original one) was then stated again by Shri Bhaskararaya and his successors. My guru in Shrividya comes from this lineage; he told that original Shankara’s doctrine was Kaula one. Same was confirmed by Amritanandanatha, modern Shrividya Tantric master living in Devipuram, AP (http://www.vi1.org/index.shtml).

[Singhi Kaya]

Namaste Arjuna,

Case cleared in that case. May be it is Yogic. Though at this stage I'm confused between what is Yoga and what is Tantra.

I used the word tantra, because it is used in his works to describe upasana and in his Guru's books on the subject. I think the view held is all upasana by nature is tantrik. Shakti Upasana in itself is much older than tantras were compliled. Satyananda has clearly written that ananda matha is a direct lineage of Gaurapada swami. But what ever is expressed in his writings on this subject and his Guru's writings doesn't involve vira-bhava rituals. What kaula's call tantrik must be through Vira-Marga as you put it. Hence the confusion. About MitA siddhi vs Mukti, I haven't read anything like Shaktibad before where work is so clearly expounded. Shaktibad comes from the level of development of purushottama-the highest perfection, so I'll ignore that part.

Thanks for the info - clears some mist. And untill I gather more knowledge I should not be using the term Tantra in fornt of a Tantrik.

[Singhi Kaya]

Seeing all this, i would state that Satyananda’s system is not Tantra. However this doesn’t mean it is of no use or whatsoever. It has full right to exist for those who are inclined towards full sannyasa in vedic sense. Also, U may go in that way if U will.

Mukti Perfection whatever one calls it depends on how our awareness is progressing towards perfection. Once state metal development is can be easily classified using Shaktibad (Ganesh, Surya, Vishnu, Shiva and Shakti).
Tantra, Mantra or Yoga are just scientific tools to develop from one stage to next. I don't think any of them is realization but aid to it. One's state of realization is expressed faintly in their thought and speech and much more clearly in work. In this long journey one has to choose whatever (Karma, Yoga or Tantra) suits him/her the best in tht point of time. My idea of realization is not abstract one thanks to Shaktibad. Ganesh Surya and Vishnu are sates in chitta. At the end of the Vishnu one encounters the ahang (ego) or rudra granthi. (Surya and Vishnu have been traditionally called brahma and Vishnu Granthis). This is the greatest barrier to development, this is where we as jiva's identify with our existence - for other this is Jiva. Evil is born from here. As one crosses this one becomes a shiva and a jivan mukta. He/She need not born again. But cosmic conciousness develops to the higest Shakti level which is purushottama. Attaining that level in realization is next to impossible. Krishna was a rare one of them. But our work/karma should be based on principles of Shakti.

As long as I remember this - whatever suits to specific spritual needs should be fine. No? Of course it has to be scientific.

In this case U won’t be able to marry, that’s all.

My question is if I don't marry can I still be initiatedto tantra (this hypothetical though)

[Arjuna]

Original tradition of Gaudapada and Shankara was Kaula one. It was divided into teaching for grihasthas and for sannyasins. For grihasthas vamachara (not extreme one of course) was there, while sannyasins kept brahmacharya. I am not sure whether there existed kaulavaduta-dom in this tradition. Thus, if Satyananda states that brahmacharya is required for sannyasins, it's OK. If for EVERYONE, this is wrong according to Hindu-dharma, to Tantras and to his own parampara.
Vedic sannyasa is the ONLY exception from literal vamachara for all Shakta-upasakas.

[Arjuna]

My question is if I don't marry can I still be initiatedto tantra (this hypothetical though)

Of course there is no such a requirement to get married (although it is normal to Hindu-dharma and beneficial for Tantra-upasana to do so).
Preliminary (sAmAnya or pashu) dikshas are not connected with 5M or anything like that, but basically with giving of vidya (mantra). As U get vidya of Guru-paduka U join that lineage. It is supposed that U do not stop here and progress to next level, vira-bhava. At this stage U have only three options to go further:
1. U get married (if not already) and practice with Ur wife, svakiya-shakti.
2. If for some reason U do not want to marry, or if Ur wife is against sadhana, U practice with another initiated woman, parakiya-shakti (either unmarried or somebody's else wife — but never of Guru or another Kaula).
3. Third possibility is trying to "jump" to sannyasa directly, that is to siddhantachara level of sadhana. There is NO legacy for this in Tantras (in other words, it should not be done), however practically it may be possible if Guru agrees (normally he won't without some special valid reason).

To get purnabhisheka U have to have a partner (if not wife then temporary one). Sannyasa case is in fact awkward, for there is no reason to go into Kaula-tantra if U desire to be an ascetic. There are many other traditions like Natha or Vira-shaiva that do not prescribe Vamachara.

Divya is a level succeeding vira, one cannot turn from pashu to divya directly (unless through exceptional direct grace of Devi). Of course, chakrasadhana is not a must (it's a rare blessing), but stri-puja and maithuna is.

Begali Kaula-saint Brahmananda Giri in Tara-rahasya said that if one worships Tara without vamachara, he goes to hell. Similar statements are there in many other Tantras. There is no Mahavidya worship without worship of live incarnations of Devi — women.

In fact it is possible that the doctrine Satyananda describes openly is a pashu-level of his own teaching. That i cannot say.