Theos-Talk Archives (December 1998 Message tt00285)

Regardless of what is said below about the authenticity or the reality of the
so called "karmamudra" or sexual Tantra teaching--its original purpose is NOT
for the spiritual awakening of its practitioners, but SOLELY for the activity
of creating "Tulku" or facilitating the "immediate" reincarnation (upon their
death) of the Highest Lamas of ALL sects or monasterries such as the Karmapa,
Teshu-Panchen, and Dalai Lamas, etc.  That is why it is called the "Sacred
Practice".  Any other usage is a pernicious distortion of the practice used
for the gaining of personal magical powers, the raising of Kundalini for such
purposes, or as sexual gratification--all of which are specifically forbidden
to monks--(who generally practice celibacy for the conservation of Kundalini
which is a must in trying to reach "Bodhicitta mind")--in most theosophically
friendly Buddhist Sects, as well as by the NON-Buddhist Adept teachers of HPB.
(See my previous post for a quote indicating what HPB says about the Masters'
"company of Adepts" who "act together" and the Lamas who are "ignorant fools
mostly"--and see my earlier posts on the real meaning of the words
"karmamudra" and "Tulku").

LHM

--------------------------------------------
In a message dated 12/31/98 2:49:37 AM, Daniel wrote:

>SUBJECT:  A Blavatsky Student Gives View of "Karmamudra"
>
>A serious Blavatsky student wrote me a few weeks ago on "karmamudra."  I've
been
>given permission to publish the gist of the letter on Theos-Talk.  Name has
been
>omitted.
>
>Daniel
>
>Dan,
>
>Regarding the karmamudra practice, I am not sure that the others on
>Theos-Talk fully appreciate the significance of the issues you were
>raising.  I agree that these are very  important matters for
>Theosophists now that the Tibetans have let all this out.
>
>I think you would like to think that all these things are allegorical or
>symbolical like the pork dinner which supposedly caused the Buddha's
>death. However I don't think you can interpret this material in that
>way.
>
>That is not to say it does not have transcendental or symbolical
>dimensions but the subject matter clearly deals with what the Mahatmas
>used to discretely refer to as "physiological" issues.
>
>When the 1st Dalai Lama (one of Tsongkhapa's direct disciples) writes
>that  "Karmamudra is explained as the practice performed with a maiden
>possessing the physical attributes of a woman, such as beautiful hair
>and so forth, with whom one has a strong karmic link"  it seems to me
>that he is talking about a real person.
>
>When Tsongkhapa says that both oneself and the yogic "partner" must have
>received initiation, keep all the vows and pledges, and have mastery of
>all the "64 arts" described in the kamasutra it seems to me that he is
>talking about real people doing real things.
>
>Couple this with the explanations given in the actual initiations  (a
>highest yoga tantra initiation such as Kalachakra or Chakrasamvara) and
>I just don't see how you can get around it.
>
>The Himalayan group of Masters plainly were followers of the high
>lamas--specifically the Dalai and Panchen lamas--(see Maha Chohan's
>letter at http://www.halcyon.com/theosnw/theos/th-choh.htm ) and these
>gentlemen have been teaching the same things for hundreds of years.  If
>you read the texts spanning century after century there is very little
>sign of  "innovation".
>
>I think that in HPB's time all this was strictly confidential.  I am not
>even sure how much HPB herself was told about it.  The Dalai lama has
>stated that there was so much public misinformation about tantra that it
>was the lesser of two evils to let out correct information at this time.
>I simply don't know.  At one time I confidently asserted  based on my
>reading of HPB that all this tantric stuff was allegorical.  Then
>reading a book giving the text of the Kalachakra initiation with
>commentaries by HH the Dalai Lama, imagine my surprise when  I read all
>its comments on the orgasm, clear-light, etc. thrown out there for the
>public to read!   Anyway I have done away with my squeamishmess (at
>least most of it) after seeing that this is what they really teach and
>what they have apparently been teaching for hundreds and thousands of
>years.   I think we just have to trust in the wisdom of those in charge
>of the program.
>
>Of one thing I think we can be sure.  These things are very sacred. We
>are not talking about casual or recreational sex here  but about the
>creative function as a religious ceremony (see SD I:209-10).  As such it
>must be treated with respect.
>
>As Tsongkhapa says:
>
>"All the authoritative tantric scriptures and treatises point out that
>the practice of Karmamudra is only to be performed by those who are
>qualified.  To engage in it on any other basis only opens the door to
>the lower realms. The practice itself should be learned from a qualified
>master holding the authentic oral tradition."
>
>Perhaps you may disagree with these observations and if so I would
>certainly like to know your thoughts on the subject.