In the Tantric maze

"Tantra Illuminated: The Philosophy, History, and Practice of a Timeless Tradition" is a 2012/2013 book by Christopher D Wallis, an American scholar and practitioner of Tantrism, a rather notorious esoteric tradition within Hinduism and Buddhism. "Tantra Illuminated" is an attempt to write a popularized account of Tantrism, or one that is accesible to at least *somebody* outside the ivory tower of academia (and, I suppose, the kulas of Tantrism). The book gives a very eclectic impression, and it´s therefore possible that it may confuse the reader more than it illuminates. But then, Tantrism is a vast and complex topic, and Wallis´ tome is certainly not worse than any other I´ve come across this side of the Kashmir Valley...

Strictly speaking, the author "only" covers Non-Dual Shaiva Tantrism, mostly from its "classical" period during what we would call the Middle Ages (but before the Muslim conquests in India). At the time, Shaktism was still part of Shaivism. Or so Wallis argues. He also believes that Tantrism and Shaivism were the same tradition, the more "civilized" form of Shaivism that still exists being a later development. Wallis also points out that no "Hindu" identity existed before the Muslim conquests, indeed, the term "Hinduism" comes from the 19th century. Originally, Shaivism was a separate religion, and so were Brahmanism and Vaishnavism, and (of course) Buddhism and Jainism. 

While the author (who presumably lives in California) tries to paint Tantrism as "egalitarian", its real social base does shine forth here and there in the book. This was the religion of the Indian aristocracy, many prominent Tantrists being royal ministers. The most well known teacher of Non-Dual Shaiva Tantra, Abhinava Gupta from Kashmir, is portrayed as a refined nobelman and aesthete, surrounded by his own retinue in luxurious surroundings. Tantrism enjoyed liberal royal patronage, and therefore entered a period of sharp decline and crisis when the Muslims conquered the Indian kingdoms where it was a de facto state religion. The typical Tantrika of the later period became the wandering fakir, a social outcast that inspired both awe and dread, was mostly interested in attaining "magical" powers, and who presumably was much less refind than Abhinava. Tantrism did survive in southern India, but now as a Brahmanized and domesticated tradition. A comic example is how the Tantric goddess Tripura Sundari went from being depicted as a red-skinned almost-nude teenage girl, to a fully dressed ditto in a red sari! While red is apparently the color of passion, it does seem that the goddess has been made (somewhat) safe for polite company... 

What is less clear to me (and perhaps to Wallis) is how Tantrism first emerged, since the tradition does have traits suggesting origins far outside a luxury-loving medieval aristocracy. One is the curious rejection of caste distinctions, obviously illogical in a caste society. There are also rituals reminescent of possession cults. Even seemingly trivial ideas (trivial for a religion) such as belief in spirits and demons, are anything but, since Wallis believes that standard Vedic religion by this time had become a crypto-atheist empty ritualism. The "primitivist" strands of Tantrism may indeed point to origins among tribals excluded from Vedic orthopraxy. Or Dravidians? (Insert comment about the IVC and Pashupati here.) 

"Tantra Illuminated" makes a valiant attempt to describe the incredibly complicated Tantric rituals, some of which can take days to complete. A proper initiation ritual includes sleeping at the place of initiation, and discussing the contents of one´s dreams with the guru. Meditation and visualization are also part of the ritual. Since only a god can worship a god, the worshipper must "become a god" by visualizing himself as such. Other mental and physical techniques have as their goal to raise the kundalini, or experience the cosmic energies, for instance in the form of a fiery wheel! The author believes that traditional hatha yoga was to a large extent Tantric, with only a small contribution from the famed Patanjali. The main source on kundalini yoga and the six-chakra system is the Kaubjika sampradaya, a form of Tantrism worshipping Shiva and the goddess Kubjika.  

Most Westerners associate Tantrism with sex, and Wallis spends some time debunking this (not entirely succesfully). The point of having "maithuna" was the transgression as such. Thus, a Tantric Brahmin might have sex with a low-caste woman (Wallis doesn´t say so, but presumably it would be a prostitute), in the same way as he would drink alcohol or imbibe small quantities of feces or semen. By transgressing caste norms, the unreality of caste is demonstrated. Also, Non-Dual Shaiva Tantra claims that everything is Shiva - therefore everything (including transgressive acts) must be holy. The author half-jokingly suggests that perhaps in California, with its hedonistic sexuality but strong New Age vego-culture, a more relevant transgressive act would be to eat a hamburger at McDonalds! Other forms of Tantric sex are really meditation techniques, or magical ditto. While this is perhaps true, the whole tenor of Tantrism (or at least some forms of it) seems to be hedonistic, sensual and sexual. What would a medieval Kashmiri Tantrist have done if exposed to Western neo-Tantrism? Reject it? Or integrate it into his grand synthesis? Or indulge in it for non-spiritual reasons, as you may indulge in good food or fine art? But then, that too is Shiva... (As for Oom the Omnipotent, I think the entire topic of Western sex magic is yuge. See "Why Mrs Blake Cried" by Marsha Keith Schuchard, "A Time of Sifting" by Paul Peucker, and "The Secret History of Western Sexual Mysticism" by Arthur Versluis. Note also that Swedenborg met a Russian Freemason who may have been initiated by a Mongol Tantrika!)

What is hardest to accept with Non-Dual Shaiva Tantra (at least to my own humble Shiva nature) is the non-dualism itself, the idea that everything is Shiva, and that everything is therefore already divine, including every moment. (Yes, I´m going to argue from Hitler. So now it´s done.) Shiva voluntarily hides himself from himself "as an act of love" by seemingly splitting up into myriads of living beings and inanimate objects, and then forgets himself. This is why we suffer, the suffering being a kind of reminder that we are really Shiva and can return to the blissful state of perfect non-dual awareness at any moment. This is simply absurd, and note also that it makes God responsible for evil and suffering, while simultaneously turning suffering into a kind of sport indulged in by God for the hell of it. Unless "God" is interpreted in a more impersonal way, but then the system is just a form of atheism or spiritualized materialism. 

Perhaps there is a Shiva-Shakti ground of being in the cosmos, but I have a strong feeling (or is it faith) that there must be much more besides... 

How about Perfection?