Theos-Talk Archives (May 1996 Message tl00417)

Rich writes and Jerry S. responds,

> >But I would look first for HPB's Stanzas of Dzyan in the various tantras,
> >particularly the "inner" and "secret" parts of Kalachakra tantra which
David
> >Reigle is pointing at.
>
>  Rich, I agree with you here, and I think Buddhist Tantras
> are the place to look.  But how do you jive this idea with HPB's
> constant ridicule and scorn of tantricism?


If we look closely at HPB's statements (I don't have time to dig up all the
quotes on this, but I will if anyone expresses SERIOUS doubt) we find that
she distinguishes between the "left" and "right" hand paths.  She tends to
disparage the Red Caps as permissive, even "Sorcerors" while upholding the
more "ascetic" Yellow Caps.

I find this a rather broad, unfounded generalization, but nevertheless, we
know that ALL the various schools have Tantras.  HPB's great hero
Tsong-Kha-Pa, the first (retroactive) Dalai Lama and leader of the Gelugpa
"Reform" sect, was more reticent about teaching the Tantras, but supported
them as well.

So HPB was committed to the Buddhist inner teachings (Tantras) just by
supporting ANY kind of Buddhism in Tibet.  Then there is her statement in the
S.D. (Preface, p. lxii) that the "very ancient manuscript" before her was the
original of the books of "Kiu-Ti" which can be none other than the phonetic
spelling of the Tibetan "rGyud-sDe" which is literally "Tantra."

I think HPB would have had a VERY difficult time explaining to the Victorian
public exactly how to distinguish between LITERAL and METAPHORICAL sexual
symbolism, and so probably thought it better to leave off discussion of the
Tantras.  She was most certainly opposed to monks LITERALLY practicing sex
according to Tantric symbolism, becuase it would not only break their vows
but because of all the occult effects of sexual relations which she discusses
in a few private documents.  This is also the position of the Gelug-pa school
today, that the sexual symbolism in the Tantras CANNOT be practised
physically by monks.

This is very disappointing to modern Westerners, who have rushed to the
stores to buy "tantric sex" books.  Forgive me, but I have only the most
nauseous reaction to this kind of materialization of the Tantras.  They were
never meant as a kind of "Kama-sutra" to titillate the public, but formed the
culmination of YEARS of straight Abhidharma and Mahayana study, reserved only
for the elite, initiated few.

This kind of materialization could only have been expected, however, and HPB
thus spoke of Tantras as little as possible, knowing that they would be made
public by the lama preservers soon enough.

At least, that's my take on it.