Talk:Tantra

Recommandation

For a good reference I would recommend "Tantra in Tibet" by Tsongkapa with forward by His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama. Too often in popular Western culture, the practice of Tantra is confused with or too overtly linked with sexual practices. Sexual practices are used in some reputable traditions, but only come late in advance training via a compassionately established relationship. Such sexual practices are first preceded with rigorous step by step practices of energy exchange methods that are developed and mastered over time with one's tantric partner. Trantra is not sex, good tantric practice with a partner does not require sex, and the incorrect or inappropriate use of attempting to couple sexual practice with a partner can cause more harm that good. One's right intentions must always be to bring good to those we encounter and to the world as a whole. Remember always that this is the 'secret mantra', or maybe more accurately the 'private manta' of compassion with our tantric partner. Most Compassionately, Sigung Dan.

Bhattacharyya book

@VictoriaGrayson, @Redtigerxyz: There are two cites for N. N. Bhattacharyya, but they have the same isbn, as the 1982 version. Is there and has anyone seen the first and the "2nd edition"? This article needs some work, both in the main section and the lead. Have a look at what other tertiary sources have to say: 1 and 2. @VG/@R/others: if your schedule permits, could you please look at the summary and references cited in the David Gray's Oxford source and update this article? @Joshua Jonathan:: your thoughts and suggestions? Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 19:08, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

No. Tantra is such an incredibly complex topic; I know hardly anything about it. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:03, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Etymology

The etymology of the word - which is very meaningful as well as Tan Tra - The body+instrument. The body as the instrument for God realisation, just like Mantra - The mind as an instrument. And Yantra - another related discipline. Can we have someone to look this up. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.62.156.116 (talk) 20:04, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Not relialble

Can we discuss here why the text is not reliable --Shrikanthv (talk) 19:44, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

He isn't a scholar.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 22:46, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

I have restored the article to the version by @VictoriaGrayson. The Aurobindo text is a hundred year old book, and there has been a lot of WP:RS on tantra in last 40 years. Pages 42-43 are not stating what you added (such as the stuff on Purusha). Rather, it is Yoga context discussion. The article already covers the various meanings of Tantra and the Vedic context. Also, rawattractionmagazine.com is non-RS (whoever added it). Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 23:19, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Why don't you delete the topic itself because it is so old!, I see that there is preconcieved notions and vigor to protect one's notion , as any pecular changes to known boundries would destabilize ones "I" eventually leading to a sensation of "no purpose" :) Shrikanthv (talk) 08:18, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

And you can download actuall book here and read page 42-43 about purusha, but I see no point in further discussion. the book Shrikanthv (talk) 08:22, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

There is a difference between a "very old source" and "very old topic". We can't be unduly or exclusively highlighting archaic 100+ years old WP:SPS style interpretation, when later peer reviewed scholarship and reviews are available, and the mainstream scholarship has moved further in its understanding based on additionally discovered manuscripts, discounting of unauthentic texts, further studies and such. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 09:59, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

What you are saying is particular true to scientific discoveries where we have with time have better understanding of things also may be more detailed information. but this is relatively not applicable to the topic what we are talking about as it is not a objective truth of things. but the topic in question as you see it, with time as always been tried to be applied to make sence for that period of time, and has been considerably diluted & reduced (my opinion) , but its essence does not lie in time bound interpretation nor in evedential analysis (unlike Archeology or Anthropology) but in the hidden truths, sorry this is also as i have seen the downfall of western view on Indian topics , yes you can have a deep analysis of each things are and try to summarise and try to make sence, but sorry this will not bring about the answer here but will bring about mere reduction of things to "no valuenes" . Shrikanthv (talk) 12:29, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

You may be assuming that we have means to know history / religious concepts / past society / past culture, related to tantra or something else, beyond material evidence (archeology e.g.) or literary evidence (manuscripts e.g.). You may also be assuming that either of these evidence do not get corrupted or have not been corrupted or there is no need for any further scholarship for "better understanding" or critical cross examination since Aurobindo and others told everything already. We disagree. Let us avoid WP:FORUM-y debate here, nor ignore wikipedia's content guidelines. FWIW, a text by Aurobindo published by Aurobindo Ashram is a non-peer reviewed SPS style publication, that is also very old. All that makes it non-RS. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 10:06, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

you have every right to assume that i assumed thats why i stated in the beginning that no use in discussion and again thanks for keeping everything under control!! barnstar for saving the day :) --Shrikanthv (talk) 19:35, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Useful Infographic

Hello, I found a useful Infographic about Tantra. Maybe it could fit to the article. http://metamonks.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/tantra-infographic-web-new.jpg

I found it here: http://omooni.com/blog/how-to-practice-tantra-ultimate-beginners-guide/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.193.62.40 (talk) 13:54, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Daoism has nothing to do with Tantra

I am always frightened by the ignorance of western scholars when they write anything about Daoism (or Shinto).In fact daosit practices are attested for at least some thousand years before any contact could have happened between India and China: one has just to read carefully Lao Zi and Zhuang Zi. Moreover, even though they indeed show some similarities in principles and practice, they are also essentially different in approach, theory and concrete practices, as anyone acquainted with them both can tell: e.g. in daoist alchemy the opening of the central channel is just the first step of a very complex and long process.Aldrasto11 (talk) 02:39, 12 July 2018 (UTC)