Tantra Influences in Gaudiya Vaishnavism -

Well I suggested we start a 'Tantra influence in Gaudiya Vaishnavism' thread but have not had time to formulate an intro, besides your statement here seems to fit the bill..

all the best,

jijaji

I spent a bit of time over the past couple of days looking into the Bhagavata commentaries where the word "tantra" or "tAntrika" is used. It was somewhat interesting though not very conclusive.

In 1.3.8, Narada avatar is credited with founding the "sAtvata-tantra", which is identified by the commentators as pancaratragama. This is pretty much the consistent interpretation given throughout, in the few places that the word comes up. Chapter 12.11 is interesting, as the word comes up three times, but the context is a visva-rupa type description. The context appears to be something like an "AvaraNa-pUjA" type of thing. In other words, that aspect of the puja that brings in AvaraNa elements is given precedence.

This seems to be confirmed by the mysterious 11.5.31-32, where the Kali Yuga avatar is introduced. nAnA-tantra-vidhAnena, which Sridhar glosses kalau tantra-mArgasya prAdhAnyaM darzayati, meaning that this text is meant to show that the Tantric path is predominant in the age of Kali. The next verse says "sAGgopAGgAstra-pArSadam" which confirms the above theme. Alternatively, the words nAnA etc., could be read with the first line of 11.5.31, which states "This is the way Krishna is worshiped in the Dvapara age." None of the commentaries have stated this, but it seems most reasonable. After all, verse 32 does say "yajJaiH saGkIrtana-prAyair yajanti hi sumedhasaH." Nothing anywhere in the Bhagavata indicates the priority of the Pancharatra path, nor does it make logical sense that it would.

11.3. is another important chapter to analyse.

OK that's all I have time for now.

Bhagavatam 11.3 is indeed interesting. It's a fairly complex chapter, but it has a discussion of both Bhagavata-dharma and Karma, which is divided into Vaidika and Tantrika portions. Vishwanath's commentary on verse 33 is interesting:

"The Bhagavata Dharma is taught in terms of actions (anuSThAnas) up to verse 31 (smarantaH smArayantaz ca). Then it concludes with instructions to cultivate the desire for ecstatic symptoms (verse 32). "When will my body also erupt in ecstatic symptoms?"

More later.

(I have added BhP 11.3, though it is still incomplete. The relevant portions have been done.)

There are three chapters given on 'The Meanings of Love' in the research publication : 'The Sacred and Profane Dimensions of Love in Indian Traditions As Exemplified in the Gita Govinda of Jayadeva' by Lee Siegel.Chapters -
1. Caitanya
2. Tantra
3. Sahajiyaa
Here are some excerpts from the second chapter- Tantra:
http://forums.delphiforums.com/jayaradhey/messages?msg=14.34
http://forums.delphiforums.com/jayaradhey/messages?msg=14.33

Just to complete this scattered thought. The last section of Bhagavata 11.3 begins at verse 41 where Nimi asks about karma-yoga. The discussion that follows divides karma-yoga into two—vaidika and tantrika. This duality (veda-tantra) comes up more than once in the Bhagavata (e.g. 8.6.9, 11.5.28, 11.11.37, 11.27.7, 11.27.26, 11.27.49, 12.11.4), reflecting concerns in South India about these two paths as in need of synthesis. Yamuna's Agama-pramanyam is of course the principal reflection of this conflict.

The Vaidika karmas are meant for self-purification, but are often indirect, but not to be neglected. (11.3.44 is parokSa-vAdo vedo’yam) They are meant for the most ignorant (bAlAnuzAsanam). Those who have been initiated, however, should engage in Tantrika karmas, i.e., take instruction from the guru in the Agamas, or the worship of the Lord in his deity form. (11.3.48). The rest of the chapter (49-55) gives a brief synopsis of the Tantra karmas, including a description of AvaraNa pUjA in verses 52-53 (sAGgopAGgAM sa-pArSadaM).

The similarity of wording in 11.3.52 and 11.5.32 cannot be accidental. The commentaries are unfortunately sparse here. One thing that appears clear to me, however, is that the description of guru in 11.3.21 and the taking of instruction in the Bhagavata Dharma (11.3.22, tatra bhAgavatAn dharmAn zikSed gurv-Atma-daivataH) and then in the Agamas (11.3.48, labdhvAnugraha AcAryAt) cannot be taken as separate.

On the whole, however, it would appear that a marked distinction is being made between the Agama-marga as a “karma” leading to purification and the Bhagavata-dharma leading to ecstasies in sravana-kirtan, etc. Overtones of madhyama adhikara are found in 11.3.26-31, and could in fact be seen as a further explanation of 11.2.46.

The criticism of those following the archana-marga in BhP 3.29 and 11.2.47 as being on the lower rungs of understanding must be taken into consideration here.

11.11.37 speaks of Vedic and Tantrik initiations.

Would you define madhyama adhikara for the sake of clarity?

I'd like to refer everyone to an older topic discussing the presence of references from various Tantras, Agamas and Samhitas in the writings of the Goswamis: read here.

Yes, you got me. "adhikAra" was not the proper word to use in the context.

I have attached Bhagavata 11.3 and 11.27 to the relevant posts above.

Some background info:

Tantra means loom in Sanskrit, or also, specifically, the warp thread that dresses the loom and gives support to the fabric formed by the moving shuttle or, in a rug, the individual knots. Without it, there can be no cloth. It can also refer to the cord used for stringing beads to make a necklace, a rosary, mala or garland. (In English, you might be familiar with "tenterhooks," as in the phrase "To be on tenterhooks," meaning to be in a state of anticipatory suspense. These hooks are the nails upon which finished cloth is stretched to maintain consistency in width.) Tantric or more rarely, tantrik, is the adjective.

The word "tantra" refers to an "oral practice tradition," where there is a direct link from teacher to student. It is important to understand that a tantric connection is more than a lineage association, or an affiliation to a tradition. To belong to a certain tantric lineage means that the skills themselves are learned, practiced, mastered, and handed on with a special kind of permission.

Esoteric Tantrism refers to an esoteric system in which exercises, practices and rituals are handed down directly from teacher to student by word of mouth, though often with the aid of teaching materials in the form of pamphlets and pictures. Such a manual can also be called a tantra. Any tantra is usually part of a system that was discovered, developed, or established, to explain, teach and initiate people into a radically different way of looking at, and acting in, the world.

The esoteric, concealed, or secret part, is often misunderstood as a reference to the intentional concealment of ancient practices. And it is true that some of these tried and true techniques sometimes rely heavily on symbolic or "twilight" language.

Also, there is little doubt that some teachers wanted to keep certain things from their competitors, and that there were times and political situations during which it was not wise to meet privately in small groups for any reason.

However, the word "esoteric" in relation to tantric information, systems, and practices, has more to so with the fact that they operate at a subconscious or subliminal level -- below the threshold of everyday awareness. Without proper explanation and careful guidance, an impatient and unprepared person could really get into trouble with some of these methods.

Attention was drawn to tantrism when some sexual aspects of it became known in the West. Unfortunately, and not surprisingly, this has led to a great deal of confusion on the subject. People incorrectly tend to assume that "tantric" means something like, "about dynamic sexual technique."

Yoga.
In pre-tractor agricultural societies, draft animals could only work together if they were kept in unison by means of a yoke. The English word is derived from the Sanskrit yug from which we get the familiar yoga. But yoga originally just meant "yoke," the set of hoops that could be attached to a long shaft or tied to a set of reins controlled by a person. In fact, yoga is a way of referring to a tantric tradition.

In tantrism, the student and teacher are yoked or linked by the teachings, and by obligations and responsibilities. The individual is linked to past masters. The aspects of the teaching are linked: word with action, thought and sound, visualization and gesture, etc. Not least, the outer actions and words link to the practitioner's psychology and other characteristics and inclinations.

The connotation of the word "yoga" is "discipline" in the sense of training to learn a technique. In the ancient Indian worldview, there was little division between mental, physical and spiritual aspirations. If a person wanted to be a better fighter, they had to learn to be a better thinker and concentrator, too. And they also had to consider why they wanted to achieve their physical goals, and what use that might be in the long run. So, in yoga, the various aspects of the person are yoked to accomplish a task or a goal.

Student and teacher are yoked in a special relationship of confidence and trust. Students of the same teacher, school or lineage may consider themselves to be yoked together, too.

In the West, that comprehensive kind of training is fairly new. For example, visualization as a means of obtaining improved results in sports has only been used for about a generation. In India and later, in Tibet and in China too, the body-mind connection has been understood and practiced for thousands of years.
There are various types of yoga, any and all of which may form part of a tantric system. "

(from http://www.khandro.net/Buddhism_tantric.htm)

Kulapavana, Thanks for the detailed info on Tantra. However I think that your information is a little too general.

When we talk of Tantra in the context of (Gaudiya) Vaisnavism we are talking about Pancaratra or Agama as Jagat pointed out. Tantra is a non-Vedic system. The system of following the original Vedas is called Srauta or following the Srutis.

Here is a quote from HBV.

tathA cha viShNu-yAmale—
kRRite shruty-ukta-mArgaH syAt tretAyAM smRRiti-bhAvitaH .
dvApare tu purANoktaH kalAv Agama-sambhavaH 5.4

And also in Visnu Yamala—

In Satya Yuga the path was to follow the Srutis, in Treta the Smrtis, in Dvapara the Puranas and in Kali the Agamas. (HBV 5.4)

So Tantra or Agama is a process that is recommended in Kali yuga.

Also could I have Jagat's comment on this. ACBVS was fond of saying that the two paths Bhagavata vidhi and Pancaratric vidhi were both to be followed side by side. However you seem to be saying that Gaudiya Vaisnavism favors following (smarana, kirtana, etc) which you characterize as given in the Bhagavata and downplaying the Prancaratric procedure of puja and homa, etc. But isn't it true that there are many places in the Bhagavatam itself were intricate pujas and ceremonies are also encouraged and even in Lord Krsna's Instructions on Deity Worship he mentions that He should be worshiped with Vedic, Tantric or Mixed systems?

Keshava

That's the conclusion I draw from an analysis of BhP 11.3 and 11.27. But I must admit to being persuaded by Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati's argumentation in this. He broadly identified Bhagavata-marga with Raganuga bhakti and Pancharatra with vidhi.

I find the Puranas=Dvapara and Tantras=Kali to contradict the "harer nAma" verse. Don't you? Isn't Pancharatra equivalent to temple worship, which is the Dvapara practice?

There is no such thing as true equality. Both Pancharatrik and Bhagavata sampradayas accept aspects of the other. Pancharatra is more concerned with ritual, Bhagavata with bhava. Both acknowledge that the other path complements their own (as Rupa does in BRS 1.1.11), but they nevertheless give prominence to one or the other. This Vishwanath clearly points out in 11.3.33.

I think that it may be relevant to consider the question of "justifcation by faith alone." The fact that the Bhagavatam refers to Vaidika or Tantrika rites as "karmas" and "kriyas", i.e. works, indicates that there is an element of such consciousness.

Harinam is distinguished from all zubha-kriyas. Nevertheless, we all make a distinction between zuddha-nAma and nAmAbhAsa, which shows that even such devotional activities can be empty shells if there is no "faith" (the Christian term) or "bhava" (Vaishnava). This is really what Krishna is talking about in 10.32.22.

Gaudiya Vaishnava raganuga bhakti also can be split in two--mantramayi and svarasiki. I would feel decidedly uncomfortable with someone who said one could attain the latter without the former.

But in reallity do Raganuga Bhaktas give up Arcana? I mean it seems like there is plenty of Raganuga ritualism also?



The worship of God goes on in all Yugas. Yes, I agree that this verse doesn't follow the regular pattern and appears to be just another method of dividing the sastras amongst yugas. Part of the need we see for sometimes excessive catagorization in Sanskrit. However there is some truth to it. In earliest times people followed the Sruti for their practice/rituals and perfromed Vedic homas as well as mdeitation which are recommended in the Sruti (Upanisads). Then later Smrti texts became more prominent with their rules and regs. The puranic influences on ritualism came after that. Nowadays we don't see Srauta ceremonies much at all everything is Agamic/Tantric.

Regarding "hare nama, etc" please note that practically all Pancaratric ritualism involve Hare Nama in the sense that the mantras used are all filled with names of God.

What is the difference in your opinion of chanting "Hare Krsna Rama" ie vocatives in the mahamantra, and "om haraye namah, om krsnaya namah, om ramaya namah" all datives, which is done while performing arcana (eg acamana)?

Aren't these also hare namas?

Does the difference in Vibhakti mean a difference in Bhakti? (Sorry, I couldn't help asking it in this way)

What about the chanting of gopal mantra or kamadeva gayatri? Aren't these part of Raganuga bhajan? Or are they confined to Vaidhi Bhakti?

While we are on this quesion, if the mahamantra is mentioned in Kali Santaranyopanisad then does not this mean that it is considered a Vedic mantra? How is it then that as a Vedic mantra it is recommended for chanting in Kali anyway?

Sorry, are you saying that deity worship is (just) a zubha-kriya? Can any of the ceremonies that were indicated as yuga dharmas (for other ages) be simply called zubha-kriyas?




So it is just a matter of how much ritualism is important not whether it is important. Faith/Bhava is of course understood as an essential aspect of all paths.

I am just speculating on reading this text. "kriyA" is of course a pancharatra term. I was also surprised to see things expressed in this way. The commentaries are somewhat diffident.

Here is the upgraded 11.3, now complete with all four commentaries edited.

With regards the distinction, I am simply saying that it is a question of where the emphasis lies. That's why I said we cannot make the two approaches completely equal.

However, with regards to the way the Gaudiya Vaishnava sees sadhana at its later stages, this is stated by Gopala Bhatta in these lovely verses at the end of HBV--

prabhAte cArdha-rAtre ce madhyAhne diva-saGkSaye
kIrtayanti hariM ye vai na teSAm anya-sAdhanam

The single-minded devotee who chants the Holy Names of the Lord in the morning, in the middle of night, at noon and at the end of the day, has absolutely no need for any other spiritual practice. (Hari-bhakti-viläsa 20.379)

evam ekAntinAM prAyaH kIrtanaM smaraNaM prabhoH
kurvatAM parama-prItyA kRtyam anyan na rocate
bhAvena kenacit preSTha-zrI-mUrter aGghri-sevane
syAd icchaiSAM sva-mantreNa sva-rasenaiva tad-vidhiH
vihiteSv eva nityeSu pravartante svayaM hi te

Exclusive devotees engage in practically nothing other than chanting the Holy Name and remembering Krishna’s pastimes. Doing this with supreme love, they have no taste for any other activity. They may also serve their beloved Deities according to their own particular mood, following their own desires and using their personal mantra. They also set the rules for this worship according to their personal taste. Regular duties (like bathing, etc.) are conducted automatically (without external prodding). (20.382-384)

krishna mantra haite habe saMsAra mocana
krishna nAma haite pAbe krishnera carana

By chanting the Krishna mantra one will be liberated from material existence.
And by chanting Krishna’s name, one will attain his lotus feet. (CC 1.7.73)

Much has been made of this Chaitanya Charitamrita verse, especially in the Gaudiya Math. The contrast between Krishna mantra and Krishna nama cries out for interpretation. However, it seems rather odd to take Krishna mantra to refer to the diksha mantra, as it just simply is not in context.

This is indeed how R.G.Nath understands the verse. He writes, "Under discussion here is Krishna's names and not the initiation mantras consisting of ten syllables, etc. Therefore the meaning of kRSNa-mantra is the mantra of Krishna's names, i.e., Krishna's names. By the grace of Krishna's names one both attains Krishna's lotus feet, and as a byproduct is liberated from the material condition." (Vol. 2, page 522).

Nice verses from the end of HBV.

It is reminiscent of BRS 2.8

smartavyaH satataM viSnur
vismartavyo na jAtucit
sarve vidhi niSedhAH syur
etayor eva kiGkarAH

I always qote this one to people who ask me about complex rules and pujas etc. Ultimately it comes down to this.

One thing I found interesting in your quote is that even when denying the need for any type of vidhi GBG mentions the devotee who chants in the morning, evening, noon and midnight. So even here he seems to be indicating the four classical sandhya times. Of course a simple reading seems to indicate the devotee who is chanting anytime but if this is so, then why not just say it that way. Why does he particularly mention these four times?

Another question occurs to me while reading 5th vilasa today. There are supposed to be no fixed rules for chanting the mahamantra. But sometimes we do see that there are mentioned rules for chanting. Japa for example could refer to chanting of Hare Nama or Pancaratric mantras. For example in HBV 5.64 it is said that the chanting of Japa is ineffective if Bhuta Suddhi is not performed before it.

bhUta-shuddhiM vinA kartur japa-homAdikAH kriyAH .
bhavanti niShphalAH sarvA yathA-vidhy apy aniShThitAH HBV 5.64

Since japa and homa are lumped together here it would seem to indicate that the japa indicated is of pancaratric mantras. Also the use of the word vidhi could be interpreted by you to show that this is not necessarily about Hare Nama japa. And of course the verse above comes in context in a section about the worship of the deity in the temple so it may not apply to Hare Nama japa in some other context.

But I still don't understand how Hare Nama japa cannot be called a ritual in the same sense as the japa of pancaratric mantras?

Interesting verse.

Are there any commentaries that interpret this verse as making a distinction between krishna mantra and krishna nama? Or for that matter the distinction beween "liberation from material existence" and "attaining Krishna's lotus feet"?

Sri Vaisnavas do not believe in sa-deha mukti or liberation within this lifetime so for them these two are synonymous. We often see in Vaisnava obituaries the line "He or She has attained the lotus feet of the Lord", meaning that the person has attained moksha.

A distinction between Krsna mantra and Krsna nama is there in that couplet, implying that the essence of the mantra being an incantation, is the nama. The next couplet says so, sarvamantrasAra nAma Sri Bhaktisiddhanta gives a lengthy annotation. Also in the preceeding couplet it says "kRSNamantra" japa sadA - ei mantrasAra. So the essence of all mantras is the Krsna mantra, the quintessence of which is simply the name Krsna.

Sorry to but in like that. Those slokas posted from the end of HBV are wonderful. Just imagine though, you'd otherwise have to read the whole thing before coming to them.

thank you for your clarifications. I am very impressed with your knowledge of the tradition, as shown here and on other threads.

I liked some of the general statements about Tantric approach in the quote I posted and thought they were relevant in this discussion. Sometimes a view from outside our tradition helps us notice certain things about ourselves that generally escape our "close-up" perspective.

Actually, looking more closely at those passages from CC, it would appear that Nath might be wrong.

(1) The primary context is Prakashananda's challenging questions about a sannyasi's doing kirtan.

(2) However, Mahaprabhu says his guru told him first to chant the mantra.

prabhu kohe--zuno zrIpAda ihAra kAraNa
guru more mUrkha dekhi karilo zAsana
mUrkha tumi tomAra nAhi vedAntAdhikAra
kRSNa-mantra japa sadA ei mantra sAra
kRSNa-mantra haite habe saMsAra mocan
kRSNa-nAma haite pAbe kRSNera caraNa.

That ( Jagat's post above ) would seem to make more sense. I've Sri Bhaktisiddanta's bhasya here, but it requires too much dictionary searches for me
Would you say that by mantra he means the incantation which is like a word formula that effects release from samsara, but it is the name Krsna in the mantra which effects the attainment of prem? The Krsna mantras mentioned in Sri Dhyanacandra's manual are;

1. kRSNAya govindAya gopIjanavallabhAya
2. gopijanavallabhAya
3. hare kRSNa..etc

1 and 2 would have their prefixed bija and suffixed svAhA or namah.

What other Krsna mantras are there?

Jangat Ji would you please explain in little more details?
Thanks in advance

This verse has also been discussed in an earlier thread, namely here.

Radhe!

I think it maybe a bit off topic, however, being the title of this thread about "Tantra in Vaishnavism"; it can be informative.

I was looking for books about Vaishnavism, at Honokaa's Library, and it was the first in the list to pop out:

EBSCOhost