Theos-Talk Archives (December 1998 Message tt00031)

Dan:
>SUBJECT:  Karmamudra:  Should it be understood/viewed metaphysically,
>symbolically or literally?
[...]
>But I am somewhat surprised that both Jerry and Nicholas seem to be
>saying or at least implying (maybe I am reading too much into their
>words) that the word "karmamudra" should be interpreted in a literal,
>physical fashion.

No, you are not.  A physical woman, with certain qualities, is the
karmamudra.

>In answering my question:  "Did Tsong Khapa really mean an actual
>physical female companion or consort?", Nicholas replies:  "Not for all,
>but sometimes for some".  Nicholas' words would seem to imply that Tsong
>Khapa "approved" of physical female consorts for *some* tantric adepts
>as a means of gaining liberation in one lifetime?  If this is what
>Nicholas is saying or implying, I ask, why does Nicholas take
>"karmamudra" to mean (only?) an actual, physical consort?

Since the nub of your quandary has to do with HPB's dispassionate
Theosophy vs. tantra's passionate one, I do not think my mere bookish view
is worth your time.  I will just say that virtually all Westerners and
most Asians are not qualified to practice tantra, let alone with a
karmamudra.  Somewhere in the Mahatma Letters(?) one says that we
occidentals can try to practice a little study of metaphysics and try to
meditate -- but that is all.

Twenty or 25 years ago Je Tsongkhapa's tantric stages of the path treatise
was two-thirds translated.  It is still in print.  The titles were
changed, but I think they are: TANTRA IN TIBET & YOGA OF TIBET.  Both had
comments by the present Dalai Lama.  Also a reliable version of
TSONGKHAPA'S SIX YOGAS OF NAROPA and READINGS ON THE SIX YOGAS OF NAROPA
have just come out from Snow Lion; translated by Glenn Mullin.

>Take for comparison the word "pranayama".  Many schools of yoga take
>this as part of the means or road to enlightenment, but look at what
>Blavatsky and her Masters say in their writings about pranayama.  And
>see the interpretation that HPB gives to this word "pranayama" in her
>E.S. Instructions.

The ES teachings were (as was the TS) mainly aimed at the West -- and the
West is not ready for real pranayama, which Patanjali made an intergral
part of yoga.

The human ego (Western or Eastern) is such that a spiritual teaching or
practice must be called "supreme" or "esoteric" before most people will
pay attention to it.  When we are told the plainest of truths, that our
qualifications fit us only for the kindergarten variety of spirituality,
most of us chafe and huff about it.

I think it was a disaster for the Tibetans' to introduce tantra to the
West.  The Stages of the Path and Mind Training teachings they have are
adequate for 99.9 per cent of us.

--
<> Nicholas Weeks <> am455@lafn.org <> Los Angeles
  When the energy of life is released, may I behold clearly Amitabha
  Buddha, surrounded by his hosts of Bodhisattvas.  May my being be filled
  with faith and compassion!     Je Tsong khapa