Theos-Talk Archives (March 1995 Message tl00130)

Although I have been extolling the virtues of MDN in several
postings, I want everyone to know that she, like everyone
else, was not perfect.  In her MAGIC & MYSTERY IN TIBET she
writes "Padmasambhava belonged to the degenerate sect of
tantric Buddhism."  Now, as we all know today, the Great
Saint and magician Padmasambhava is revered throughout Tibet
as the beloved guru who first brought Buddhism to Tibet.
ADN, like HPB, both had a wild hair concerning tantricism.
Now, as a theosophist, I will agree that the Hindu version
which seeks personal power should be left alone.  But the
Buddhist version seeks only knowledge IAW the Bodhisattvic
Vow, and I have found nothing in it to freighten me away.
Anyway, Arnaud Desjardins speaks of ADN's misguided stand,
and says "So it would seem that even Madame David-Neel, who
lived and studied in Tibet for many years, and who knew many
gurus, did not attach much importance to Tantrayana.  And
yet she is one of the authors writing of Tibet whose books
are considered by English speaking lamas as representative
and which they can recogmise their own country." (THE
MESSAGE OF THE TIBETANS, p 86)  Tantrayana, or tantricism,
is the Tibetan's "third Vehicle" which Desjardins says "has
been preserved in Tibet in all it purity." Indeed, we can
read a lot of Tantrayana in the flood of recent books
published by Tibetan scholars and gurus.

So what does all of this mean?  It means that somehow HPB
and ADN both misunderstood Padmasambhava and the Tantrayana.
This is probably because of its use of sex (I have already
described the use of the karmamudra to obtain bliss in a
previous posting).  But I think it unfair to call Tantrayana
black magic or degenerate just because of its use of sex.
Of course, today we are a bit more liberal on this subject.


             Jerry S.